~ 

C-NRLF 


INAUGURATION 

PRESIDENT  HENRY  CHURCHILL  KING 
OF   OBERLIN    COLLEGE 

MAY  13  1903 


INAUGURATION 

PRESIDENT  HENRY  CHURCHILL  KING 
OBERLIN  MAY  13   1903 


INAUGURATION 

PRESIDENT  HENRY  CHURCHILL  KING 
OF  OBERLIN  COLLEGE 

MAY  13   1903 


OBERLIN  OHIO 

PUBLISHED  BY  THE  COLLEGE 

1903 


THE  IMPERIAL  PRESS  CLEVELAND 


CONTENTS 


THE  INAUGURATION  EXERCISES    ....       7 

INAUGURAL    ADDRESS    BY    PRESIDENT     HENRY 

CHURCHILL  KING 21 

ADDRESS     BY      PRESIDENT      WILLIAM      JEWETT 

TUCKER,   D.  D.,   LL.  D.       .         .         .         .         .53 

ADDRESSES   BY 

HON.  J.  G.  W.  COWLES,  LL.  D.,   ON  BEHALF 
OF  THE  BOARD  OF  TRUSTEES          .         .         .61 

PROFESSOR  EDWARD  INCREASE  BOSWORTH, 

D.  D.,  ON  BEHALF  OF  THE  FACULTY    .         .67 

PRESIDENT      WILLIAM      GOODELL      FROST, 
PH.  D.,  D.  D.,  ON  BEHALF  OF  THE  ALUMNI     71 

MR.  DAHL  BUCHANAN  COOPER,  ON  BEHALF 
OF  THE  STUDENTS 75 


M10702 


INAUGURATION 

OF 

PRESIDENT    HENRY   CHURCHILL    KING 

At  the  Annual  Meeting  of  the  Board  of  Trus- 
tees of  Oberlin  College,  held  in  Oberlin  on 
Wednesday,  November  19,  1902,  Professor  Henry 
Churchill  King  was  elected  President  of  Oberlin 
College.  A  committee,  consisting  of  Dr.  Lucien 
C.  Warner,  Dr.  Henry  M.  Tenney,  and  Dr.  Judson 
Smith,  was  appointed  to  notify  the  President-elect 
of  this  action.  At  a  reception  given  at  Baldwin 
Cottage  on  the  evening  of  that  day,  Professor  King 
announced  his  acceptance,  following  this  with  a 
further  statement  to  the  students  at  the  chapel  ex- 
ercises on  Thursday,  November  20.  President 
King  undertook  immediately  the  performance  of 
the  duties  of  the  new  position. 

On  January  21,  1903,  the  Faculty  appointed  the 
following  Inauguration  Committee :  Professor  A. 
S.  Root,  Professor  H.  H.  Carter,  Mrs.  A.  A.  F. 
Johnston,  Secretary  G.  M.  Jones,  Professor  C.  W. 
Morrison,  Professor  J.  F.  Peck,  and  Professor  A. 
T.  Swing.  This  committee  recommended  to  the 
Faculty  that  the  inauguration  be  held  on  Wednes- 
day, May  13,  1903,  in  connection  with  the  "May 
Festival"  concerts  of  the  Oberlin  Musical  Union, 
May  12  and  May  13,  and  with  the  graduation  ex- 
ercises of  the  Oberlin  Theological  Seminary  on 
Thursday,  May  14. 


At  ihe  special  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Trustees, 
held  Thursday,  February  5,  1903,  the  arrange- 
ments already  made  for  the  inauguration  were  ap- 
proved, and  the  Trustees  asked  the  Faculty  to 
arrange  all  further  necessary  details.  The  Com- 
mittee thereupon  appointed  the  following  sub- 
committees : 

Entertainment:  Mr.  L.  D.  Harkness,  Mr.  C.  P.  Doo- 
little,  and  Professor  C.  W.  Morrison. 

Invitations  and  Publications :  Secretary  G.  M.  Jones,  Pro- 
fessor E.  I.  Bosworth,  and  Treasurer  J.  R.  Severance. 

Decoration:  Professor  F.  O.  Grover,  Mr.  C.  P.  Doolittle, 
Mrs.  C.  P.  Doolittle,  Professor  A.  S.  Kimball,  and  Mrs.  Her- 
bert Harroun. 

Music:  Professor  C.  W.  Morrison,  Professor  G.  W. 
Andrews,  and  Professor  A.  S.  Kimball. 

Procession :  Professor  A.  A.  Wright,  Professor  C.  E.  St. 
John,  Professor  W.  G.  Caskey,  Mr.  C.  H.  Adams,  and  Mr.  S. 
K.  Tompkins. 

Seating :  Professor  A.  E.  Heacox,  Mr.  W.  J.  Horner,  and 
Mr.  C.  S.  Pendleton. 

Invitations  were  sent  to  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  the  Governor  of  the  Commonwealth 
of  Ohio  and  other  officials,  to  the  presidents  of 
other  colleges  and  universities,  to  the  clergymen 
and  members  of  the  Council  of  the  village  of  Ober- 
lin,  to  all  alumni,  and  to  friends  of  the  college. 

The  colleges  and  universities  arranged  in  the  or- 
der of  seniority  which  were  represented  at  the 
inaugural  exercises  were  as  follows : 

LIST  OF  DELEGATES 

Harvard  University 

Professor  Edward  Caldwell  Moore,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 

[8] 


Yale  University 

Professor  Frank  Knight  Sanders,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 
University  of  Pennsylvania 

Professor  Edwin  Grant  Conklin,  Ph.D. 
Columbia  University 

Professor  Walter  Taylor  Marvin,  Ph.D. 
Brown  University 

Mr.  Charles  G.  King,  Jr. 
Dartmouth  College 

President  William  Jewett  Tucker,  D.D.,  LL.D. 
Williams  College 

President   Henry   Hopkins,   D.D.,   LL.D. 
Andover  Theological  Seminary 

Professor  William  Henry  Ryder,  D.D. 
Allegheny  College 

President  William  H.  Crawford,  D.D.,  LL.D. 
Indiana  University 

Professor  Albert  Frederick  Kuersteiner. 
Miami  University 

Professor  Andrew  D.  Hepburn,  D.D.,  LL.D. 
Kenyon  College 

Professor  Henry  Titus  West,  A.M. 
Western  Theological  Seminary 

Professor  Thomas  Hastings  Robinson,  D.D. 
Western  Reserve  University 

President  Charles  Franklin  Thwing,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Mr.  W.  S.  Tyler 
Lane  Theological  Seminary 

Professor  Henry  Goodwin  Smith,  D.D. 
McCormick  Theological  Seminary 

Professor  Augustus  Stiles  Carrier,  D.D. 
Denison  University 

Professor  Augustine  S.  Carman,  A.B. 
Hartford  Theological  Seminary 

Professor  Charles  S.  Thayer 
Marietta  College 

President  Alfred  Tyler  Perry,  D.D. 
Union  Theological  Seminary 

President  Charles  Cuthbert  Hall,  D.D. 

[9] 


University  of  Michigan 

Professor  Albert  Benjamin  Prescott,  M.D.,  LL.D. 
Mount  Holyoke  College 

Professor  Nellie  A.   Spore 
University  of  Missouri 

President  Richard  Henry  Jesse,  LL.D. 
University  of  Notre  Dame 

Professor  William  Hoynes,  LL.D. 
University  of  Toronto 

Professor  John  Roaf  Wightman,  Ph.D. 
Ohio  Wesleyan  University 

President  James  Whitford  Bashford,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 
Olivet  College 

Professor  Walter  Eugene  Colburn  Wright,  D.D. 
Wittenberg  College 

Professor  Charles  Girven  Heckert,  D.D. 
Baldwin  University 

President  E.  O.  Buxton,  D.D. 
Mount  Union  College 

President  Albert  Burdsall  Riker,  D.D. 
Beloit  College 

President  Edward  D.  Eaton,  D.D.,  LL.D. 
Otterbein  University 

President  George  Scott,  Ph.D. 
University  of  Wisconsin 

Professor  William  Amasa  Scott,  Ph.D. 
Heidelberg  University 

President  Charles  E.  Miller,  A.M. 
Northwestern  University 

Dean  Thomas  Franklin  Holgate,  Ph.D. 
Waynesburg  College 

President  Archelaus  Ewing  Turner,  A.M. 
Hillsdale  College 

President  Joseph  W.  Mauck,  LL.D. 
Berea  College 

President  William  Goodell  Frost,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 
Michigan  Agricultural  College 

President  J.  L.  Snyder,  Ph.D. 
Union  Christian  College 

President  Leander  Jefferson  Aldrich,  D.D. 

[10] 


Massachusetts  Institute  of  Technology 

Mr.  E.  A.  Handy 
Carleton  College 

Professor  Wilmot  V.  Metcalf,  Ph.D. 
Cornell  University 

Professor  Waterman  Thomas  Hewett,  Ph.D. 
University  of  Wooster 

President  Louis  Edward  Holden,  D.D.,  LL.D. 
Ohio  State  University 

Professor  William  Henry  Scott,  LL.D. 
Buchtel  College 

President  A.  B.  Church,  A.M. 
Smith  College 

President  L.   Clark  Seelye,   D.D,  LL.D. 
Wellesley  College 

President  Caroline  Hazard,  A.M.,  Litt.D. 
Johns  Hopkins  University 

Professor  John  Martin  Vincent,  Ph.D. 
Case  School  of  Applied  Science 

Acting  President  Charles  Sumner  Howe,  Ph.D. 
Tuskegee  Institute 

Mrs.  Booker  T.  Washington. 
Yankton  College 

President  Henry  Kimball  Warren,  A.M.,  LL.D. 
Findlay  College 

President  Charles  Manchester,  D.D. 
Clark  University 

Professor  Herbert  Austin  Aikens,  Ph.D. 
The  Woman's  College  of  Baltimore 

Professor  Maynard  M.  Metcalf,  Ph.D. 
University  of  Chicago 

Professor  George  Herbert  Mead,  A.B. 
Lake  Erie  College 

President  Mary  Evans,  A.M. 

The  Inaugural  Procession  comprised  the  follow- 
ing divisions : 

1.  The  Students. 

2.  The  Oberlin  Musical  Union. 

3.  The  Alumni. 

[ii] 


4-  Representatives  of  the  village  of  Oberlin — the  Board 
of  Commerce,  the  village  Council,  the  Teachers  in  the  Public 
Schools,  the  Board  of  Education,  and  the  Pastors  of  the 
Churches. 

5.  The  Faculty,  Office  Staff,  and  Prudential  Committee. 

6.  Invited  Guests,  not  representatives  of  Colleges. 

7.  Representatives  of  Colleges  and  Universities. 

8.  The  Board  of  Trustees,  the  Speakers  and  the  Pres- 
ident-elect. 

The  movements  of  the  procession  were  under  the 
direction  of  Mr.  Seeley  K.  Tompkins,  Marshal- 
in-Chief,  and  his  assistants.  As  Honorary  Marshal, 
Mr.  Louis  H.  Severance  acted  as  the  special  escort 
of  President  King.  Student  marshals  directed  the 
marching  of  the  students  in  division  i ;  division  2 
was  in  charge  of  Mr.  Earl  F.  Adams.  Mr.  Charles 
H.  Kirshner,  of  the  class  of  1886,  acted  as  head 
marshal  of  the  Alumni,  assisted  by  Professor 
Azariah  S.  Root.  Division  4  was  in  the  charge  of 
Mr.  Charles  K.  Whitney;  division  5,  of  Professor 
William  G.  Caskey;  division  6,  of  Professor  Fred 
E.  Leonard;  division  7,  of  Professor  Charles  E. 
St.  John;  and  division  8,  of  Mr.  William  C. 
Cochran. 

The  various  divisions  assembled  at  8 130  o'clock, 
at  the  appointed  places,  and  moved  promptly  at 
9  o'clock  over  the  following  route:  South  from 
Peters  Hall  to  the  corner  of  West  College  and 
North  Professor  streets;  thence  northward  upon 
the  west  side  of  North  Professor  street  as  far  as 
Tappan  Walk;  thence  eastward  under  the  Me- 
morial Arch  and  along  Tappan  Walk,  to  the  east 
side  of  the  campus ;  thence  northward  on  the  west 

[12] 


side  of  North  Main  street,  to  the  First  Congrega- 
tional Church. 

Upon  arriving  at  the  steps  of  the  Church,  the 
students  comprising  division  i  halted  and  opened 
ranks,  forming  a  passage  way  through  which  the 
other  divisions  of  the  procession  passed. 

Hon.  John  G.  W.  Cowles,  LL.  D.,  senior  mem- 
ber of  the  Board  of  Trustees,  presided  at  the  Inau- 
guration exercises,  the  program  being  as  follows : 

INAUGURATION  EXERCISES 

Processional  Hymn,  "Our  God,  our  help  in  ages  past,"  Watts 

Our  God,  our  help  in  ages  past, 

Our  hope  for  years  to  come ; 
Our  shelter  from  the  stormy  blast, 

And  our  eternal  home ! 
Under  the  shadow  of  thy  throne 

Thy  saints  have  dwelt  secure; 
Sufficient  is  thine  arm  alone, 

And  our  defense  is  sure. 

Before  the  hills  in  order  stood, 

Or  earth  received  her  frame, 
From  everlasting  thou  art  God 

To  endless  years  the  same. 
A  thousand  ages,  in  thy  sight, 

Are  like  an  evening  gone; 
Short  as  the  watch  that  ends  the  night 

Before  the  rising  sun. 

Time,  like  an  ever-rolling  stream, 

Bears  all  its  sons  away; 
They  fly,  forgotten,  as  a  dream 

Dies  at  the  opening  day. 
Our  God,  our  help  in  ages  past, 

Our  hope  for  years  to  come, 
Be  thou  our  guard  while  troubles  last, 

And  our  eternal  home. 

Organ  Prelude. — March  from  Tannhauser,  Wagner 
Invocation.    Rev.  Washington  Gladden,  D.D.,  of  Columbus,  O. 
Music:    "Banquet  Chorus,"  from  the  Odysseus,  Bruch 
By  the  Oberlin  Musical  Union 

113] 


Address  by  Hon.  J.  G.  W.  Cowles,  LL.D.,  on  behalf  of  the 

Board  of  Trustees 

Response  by  President  Henry  Churchill  King,  D.D. 
Addresses  by: — 

Professor  Edward  Increase  Bosworth,  D.D.,  on  behalf  of 

the  Faculty 
President  William  Goodell   Frost,   Ph.D.,   D.D.,   of  the 

class  of  1876,  on  behalf  of  the  Alumni 
Mr.   Dahl   Buchanan   Cooper,   of   the  class  of    1903,   on 

behalf  of  the  Students 
Music:     "And  the  Glory  of  the  Lord,"   Chorus  from  the 

Messiah,  Handel.     By  the  Oberlin  Musical  Union 
Address:     "Is  Modern  Education  Capable  of  Idealism?" 

President  William  Jewett  Tucker,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  of  Dart- 
mouth College 
Inaugural  Address:     "The  Primacy  of  the  Person  in  College 

Education."     President  Henry  Churchill  King,  D.D. 
Hymn,  "O  Master,  let  me  walk  with  Thee."     W.  Gladden. 

O  Master,  let  me  walk  with  thee 
In  lowly  paths  of  service  free; 
Tell  me  thy  secret,  help  me  bear 
The  strain  of  toil,  the  fret  of  care. 

Help  me  the  slow  of  heart  to  move 
By  some  clear,  winning  word  of  love; 
Teach  me  the  wayward  feet  to  stay, 
And  guide  them  in  the  homeward  wav. 

Teach  me  thy  patience ;  still  with  thee 
In  closer,  dearer  company, 
In  work  that  keeps  faith  sweet  and  strong, 
In  trust  that  triumphs  over  wrong, 

In  hope  that  sends  a  shining  ray 
Far  down  the  future's  broadening  way, 
In  peace  that  only  thou  canst  give, 
With  thee,  O  Master,  let  me  live. 

Closing  Prayer  and  Benediction,  President  Charles  Cuthbert 
Hall,  D.D.,  of  Union  Theological  Seminary 

Organ  Postlude,  March  from  Aida,  Verdi 

At  the  close  of  the  exercises  in  the  First  Church 
a  luncheon  was  given  at  Warner  Gymnasium  in 

[14] 


honor  of  the  representatives  of  other  colleges  and 
universities,  and  at  this  luncheon  brief  addresses 
were  made  by  President  James  Whitford  Bash- 
ford,  of  Ohio  Wesleyan  University,  President 
Caroline  Hazard,  of  Wellesley  College,  and  Pro- 
fessor Waterman  Thomas  Hewett,  of  Cornell 
University. 

Late  in  the  afternoon,  from  4  o'clock  to  5 130 
o'clock,  the  President  of  the  College  and  Mrs. 
King  gave  a  general  reception  to  all  friends  at 
Talcott  lawn. 

By  the  generosity  of  the  Oberlin  Musical  Union 
the  College  was  able  to  give  to  visiting  delegates 
and  friends  tickets  for  reserved  seats  for  the  three 
concerts  of  the  May  Festival.  The  May  Festival 
exercises  consisted  of  the  following  events : 

Tuesday,  May  12,  7  P.  M.,  Concert  by  the  Oberlin  Musi- 
cal Union,  assisted  by  the  Boston  Festival  Orchestra,  Lohengrin, 
Wagner. 

The  soloists  for  the  Lohengrin  concert  were  as  follows : 
Anita  Rio,  Elsa 
Isabelle  Bouton,  Ortrud 
William  A.  Wegener,  Lohengrin 
Emilio  de  Gogorza,  Frederick  of  Telramund 
Frederic  Martin,  King 

Wednesday,  May  13,  2  P.  M.,  Orchestra  Concert,  Richard 
Wagner  program,  by  the  Boston  Festival  Orchestra  and  soloists. 
The  program  for  this  concert  was  as  follows: 

Emil  Mollenhauer,  Conductor 

Vorspiel Tristan  and  Isolde 

Aria,  Adriano Rienzi 

Mme.  Isabelle  Bouton 
Siegfried  Idylle 


Prize  Song  (arranged  for  violin) Die  Meistersinger 

Mr.  John  Witzemann 

Ritt  der  Walkiiren Die  Walkure 

Romanza,  "The  Evening  Star" Tannhauser 

Mr.  Frederic  Martin 

Overture The  Flying  Dutchman 

Wednesday,  May  13,  7  P.  M.,  Concert  by  the  Oberlin  Musi- 
cal Union,  assisted  by  the  Boston  Festival  Orchestra,  Lohengrin, 
Wagner. 

.  The  events  of  Inauguration  Week  closed  on 
Thursday,  May  14,  with  the  dedication  of  the 
Memorial  Arch  at  10  o'clock  A.  M.  and  the  ex- 
ercises in  connection  with  the  Seventieth  Annual 
Commencement  of  the  Theological  Seminary  at 
2:30  P.  M.  The  program  at  the  dedication  of  the 
Memorial  Arch  was  as  follows : 

DEDICATION   OF   THE    MEMORIAL   ARCH 

Rev.  Judson  Smith,  D.D.,  Secretary  of  the  American  Board  of 
Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions,  Presiding 

Dedicatory  Address,  Rev.  Frank  S.  Fitch,  D.D.,  of  Buffalo, 
N.  Y. 

Dedicatory  Prayer,  Rev.  Henry  M.  Tenney,  D.D.,  of  Oberlin 
Hymn,  "The  Son  of  God  goes  forth  to  war,"  Heber 

The  Son  of  God  goes  forth  to  war, 

A  kingly  crown  to  gain; 
His  blood-red  banner  streams  afar : 

Who  follows  in  his  train? 

Who  best  can  drink  his  cup  of  woe, 

Triumphant  over  pain, 
Who  patient  bears  his  cross  below — 

He  follows  in  his  train. 

The  martyr  first,  whose  eagle  eye 

Could  pierce  beyond  the  grave, 
Who  saw  his  Master  in  the  sky, 

And  called  on  him  to  save:  i; 

[17  ] 


A  glorious  band,  the  chosen  few, 

On  whom  the  spirit  came — 
Twelve  valiant  saints,  their  hope  they  knew, 

And  mocked  the  cross  and  flame. 

They  climbed  the  steep  ascent  of  heaven 

Through  peril,  toil,  and  pain : 
O  God !  to  us  may  grace  be  given 

To  follow  in  their  train  ! 

Benediction,  Rev.  John  W.  Bradshaw,  D.D.,  of  Oberlin 

At  1 1  :oo  o'clock,  in  connection  with  the  gradua- 
tion exercises  of  the  class  of  1903  of  the  Oberlin 
Theological  Seminary,  there  were  two  addresses  at 
the  Memorial  Arch  by  students  of  the  Seminary,  as 
follows : 

Monument  Oration,  by  Mr.  Paul  Leaton  Corbin,  of  the 
Senior  Class. 

Reply,  by  Mr.  Guy  Hugh  Lemon,  of  the  Middle  Class. 

The  program  of  the  Seventieth  Annual  Com- 
mencement of  the  Oberlin  Theological  Seminary 
was  as  follows : 

COMMENCEMENT    EXERCISES    OF    THE    THEOLOGICAL    SEMINARY 

Invocation,  by  Dean  Frank  K.  Sanders,  Ph.D.,  D.D.,  of  Yale 

Divinity  School 

Music:     Selection  from  The  Redemption Gounod 

By  the  Choir  of  the  Second  Congregational  Church 
Inauguration  of  the  Dean  of  the  Theological  Seminary: 

Address  by  President  Henry  Churchill  King,  D.D. 

Response  by  Professor  Edward  Increase  Bosworth,  D.D. 

Music :     "O  Salutaris  Hostia" Liszt 

Ladies'  Quartette 
Commencement  Address,  "The  Call  of  Christ  to  the  Ministry 

of  Christ,"  By  President  Henry  Hopkins,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  of 

Williams  College 

Presentation  of  Degrees  and  Diplomas 
Benediction,  by  Professor  William   H.  Ryder,   D.D.,  of  An- 

dover  Theological  Seminary 

[  18] 


The  enjoyment  of  the  exercises  of  Inaugural 
Week  was  heightened  by  the  unusually  attractive 
weather  which  prevailed.  The  temperature  on  the 
morning  of  Inaugural  Day  was  ideal  for  such  a 
function  as  the  Inaugural  Procession,  and  the  even- 
ings were  warm  enough  for  the  full  appreciation 
of  the  campus  illuminations  which  had  been  ar- 
ranged by  the  Committee  on  Decoration. 


f  19  ! 


INAUGURAL  ADDRESS1 

THE  PRIMACY  OF  THE  PERSON  IN  COLLEGE 
EDUCATION 

BY  PRESIDENT  HENRY  CHURCHILL  KING,  D.  D. 

The  numerous  inaugurations  of  college  presidents  in  the 
last  three  or  four  years,  have  necessarily  called  out  extended 
discussions  of  educational  aims.  A  late-comer  in  the  field  hardly 
feels  at  liberty  to  ignore,  and  he  certainly  does  not  wish  merely 
to  repeat,  what  has  been  already  well  said.  To  a  certain  extent 
he  must  probably  do  both;  for  he  can  hardly  contribute  more 
than  his  individual  view-point,  and  may,  perhaps,  count  himself 
fortunate,  if,  taking  advantage  of  the  discussions  of  his  predeces- 
sors, he  can  by  a  single  degree  advance  to  greater  clearness  the 
exact  problem  of  college  education. 

But  he  may  still  find  encouragement  to  believe  that  the  task 
naturally  set  him  is  not  wholly  useless,  when  he  remembers,  that, 
in  spite  of  a  considerable  consensus  of  opinion  on  the  part  of 
college  presidents  as  to  what  a  college  education  in  general  ought 
to  be,  the  problem  of  the  precise  place  of  the  college  in  our  actual 
educational  system  has  perhaps  never  been  at  a  more  critical 
stage  than  now.  That  at  least  an  increasing  number  of  thought- 
ful observers  feel  this  to  be  the  case  there  can  be  no  doubt.  Pres- 
ident Butler  only  voices  the  fear  of  many  when  he  says:  "The 
American  college  hardly  exists  nowadays,  and,  unless  all  signs 
mislead,  those  who  want  to  get  it  back  in  all  its  useful  excel- 
lence will  have  to  fight  for  it  pretty  vigorously.  The  milk-and- 
water  substitutes  and  the  fiat  universities  that  have  taken  the 
place  of  the  colleges,  are  a  pretty  poor  return  for  what  we  have 
lost." 

For  the  rapid  changes  that  have  taken  place  in  college  edu- 
cation in  the  last  twenty-five  years  have  carried  with  them,  in 


1  Only  a  portion  of  the  full  discussion  that  follows    was    presented    at    the 
Inauguration    Exercises. 

[21] 


many  quarters  at  least,  unforeseen  and  far-reaching  conse- 
quences. The  study  of  these  consequences  has  brought  to  some 
of  the  most  careful  students  of  education,  with  whatever  recog- 
nition of  gain,  a  distinct  sense  of  loss,  most  definitely  expressed, 
perhaps,  by  Dean  Briggs  in  his  "Old-fashioned  Doubts  concern- 
ing New-fashioned  Education." 

Other  changes  in  other  departments  of  education  have 
greatly  complicated  the  problem  of  the  relation  of  the  different 
members  of  our  educational  system.  Revolutionary  changes, 
that  seem  almost,  if  not  quite,  to  involve  the  elimination  of  the 
college,  are  soberly,  even  if  reluctantly,  suggested  by  distin- 
guished educators.  And  other  changes  of  relations  that  appear 
at  first  sight  less  serious,  in  which  the  colleges  themselves  are 
acquiescing,  may  in  the  end  make  any  adequate  attainment  of 
the  older  college  ideal  equally  impossible.  The  result  of  the 
entire  situation,  therefore,  is  to  press  today  upon  American 
educators  as  never  before  these  questions:  Has  the  American 
college  a  real  function,  a  logical  and  vital  place  in  a  compre- 
hensive system  of  education  ?  or  is  it  the  blunder  of  a  crude  time 
and  a  crude  people,  an  illogical  hybrid  between  the  secondary 
school  and  the  university,  that  ought  to  hand  over  a  part  of  its 
work  to  the  secondary  school  and  the  rest  to  the  university,  and 
to  retire  promptly  from  the  scene  with  such  grace  as  it  can 
muster?  or,  at  best,  is  its  older  function  now  incapable  of 
realization  ? 

I.       THE    FUNCTION    OF    COLLEGE    EDUCATION. 

Just  because  these  questions  concern  the  place  of  college 
education  in  a  system  of  education,  they  can  be  answered  only 
in  the  light  of  a  comprehensive  survey  of  the  entire  problem 
of  education. 

The  problem  of  education  in  its  broadest  scope  may  per- 
haps be  said  to  be  the  problem  of  preparation  for  meeting  the 
needs  of  the  world's  life  and  work.  Much  of  the  training  be- 
longs necessarily  to  the  home  and  to  the  interactions  of  the  in- 
evitable relations  of  life.  Much  of  it,  probably,  can  never  be 
brought  into  any  organized  system.  But  organized  education 

[22J 


must  do  what  it  can  to  insure,  first,  that  no  men  shall  lack  that 
elementary  training  and  knowledge  without  which  they  are 
hardly  fitted  at  all  for  ordinary  human  intercourse,  or  for  intel- 
ligent work  of  any  kind  in  society,  still  less  for  growing  and 
happy  lives;  second,  that  there  shall  be  those  who  can  carry  on 
the  various  occupations  demanded  by  our  complex  civilization, 
in  the  trades,  in  business,  and  in  the  professions;  third,  that 
there  shall  be  investigators,  scientific  specialists,  extenders  of 
human  knowledge,  in  all  spheres.  None  of  these  needs  are 
likely  to  be  denied — not  even  the  last;  for  our  age  has  had  so 
many  demonstrations  of  the  practical  value  of  scientific  discov- 
eries, that  it  is  even  ready  to  grant  the  value  of  the  extension  of 
knowledge  for  its  own  sake.  That,  then,  every  man  should  have 
the  education  necessary  to  render  him  a  useful  member  of  so- 
ciety; that  the  necessary  occupations  should  be  provided  for; 
that  there  should  be  a  class  of  scientific  specialists  constantly 
pushing  out  the  boundaries  of  human  knowledge, — we  are  all 
agreed.  And  to  this  extent  at  least,  the  problems,  first,  of  the 
elementary  schools;  second,  of  the  trade,  technical,  and  profes- 
sional schools ;  and,  third,  of  the  university  proper,  are  recog- 
nized and  justified. 

Our  difficulties  begin  when  we  try  to  define  more  narrowly 
just  what  is  to  be  included  in  our  first  group  of  schools.  Ex- 
actly what  education  is  indispensable  that  one  may  become  a 
useful  member  of  society?  Virtually  we  seem  to  have  decided 
that  that  indispensable  education  is  covered  in  our  primary  and 
grammar  grades;  for  the  majority  do  not  go  further,  and  com- 
pulsory education  does  not  require  more.  And  yet,  with  prac- 
tical unanimity,  the  United  States  have  decided  that  the  State 
is  justified  in  furnishing,  and,  indeed,  is  bound  to  furnish,  that 
smaller  number  of  its  children  who  are  willing  and  able  to 
take  further  schooling,  opportunity  to  continue  for  three  or  four 
years  longer  in  studies  of  so-called  "secondary"  grade.  The 
State  can  justify  this  procedure  only  upon  the  ground  that 
such  further  study  prepares  still  better  for  citizenship,  and  that 
it  is  of  value  to  the  State  that  even  a  much  smaller  number 
should  have  this  better  preparation ;  or,  also,  and  perhaps  more 

[  23] 


commonly,  upon  the  practical  ground  that  the  secondary  educa- 
tion furnishes  the  knowledge  and  training  which,  if  not  indis- 
pensable to  citizenship,  is  indispensable  to  many  of  the  higher 
occupations  and  forms  of  service  to  the  State.  No  sharp  line,, 
certainly,  can  be  drawn  between  the  studies  of  the  grammar 
school  and  those  of  the  high  school.  And  we  all  recognize  and 
justify  the  secondary  school,  and  unhesitatingly  include  it,  as 
practically  indispensable  to  the  State  if  not  to  all  its  citizens, 
in  our  first  group  of  schools,  to  form  the  unified  public  school 
system. 

But  it  needs  to  be  borne  clearly  in  mind,  that  if  the  true 
justification  of  elementary  and  secondary  education  is  the  prepa- 
ration of  useful  members  of  society,  it  cannot  be  regarded  as 
merely  intellectual.  The  moral  side  of  the  matter  is,  if  there  is 
any  difference,  even  more  important — the  learning  of  order,  of 
obedience,  of  integrity  in  one's  work,  of  steadfastness  in  spite 
of  moods,  of  the  democratic  spirit,  of  a  real  sense  of  justice,  and 
of  the  rightful  demand  of  the  whole  upon  the  individual.  If 
these  are  not  given  in  some  good  measure,  then,  whatever  the 
intellectual  results,  in  just  so  far,  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
State,  public-school  education  is  a  failure.  And  yet  no  doubt 
it  must  be  said,  that  since  in  America  the  school  children  are 
all  in  homes,  the  American  public-school  teacher  has,  quite  nat- 
urally, not  regarded  himself  as  primarily  charged  with  anything 
but  the  intellectual  training  of  the  child.  Other  training  has 
been  largely  incidental — taken  up  only  so  far  as  the  order  of 
the  school  demanded,  or  as  it  was  inevitably  involved  in  the 
situation.  Even  so,  the  moral  training  has  been  by  no  means  un- 
important. But  it  may  be  doubted  if  there  is  any  change  in 
public-school  education  so  important  today  as  that  the  teacher 
should  plainly  recognize  that  his  real  responsibility  is  to  train 
his  charges  to  be  useful  members  of  society,  with  all  that  that 
implies.  Let  the  child  and  the  parent  and  the  teacher  all  alike 
understand  that  the  State  undertakes  the  free  education  of  all 
its  children  just  because  it  hopes  thus  to  prepare  them  to  be 
valuable  members  of  a  free  people;  and  that  whatever  is  neces- 
sary to  that  end,  provided  it  does  not  violate  individual  con- 

[241 


sciences,  is  within  the  function  of  the  public  school.  This  meansr 
of  course,  that  it  is  the  business  of  the  public  school  to  teach 
living,  as  well  as  studies. 

But  with  this  recognition  of  the  broader  function  of  the 
public  schools,  with  the  necessary  acknowledgment  of  a  real 
broadening  even  on  the  intellectual  side  of  technical  and  profes- 
sional courses,  and  with  the  present  common  admission  of  the 
danger  of  a  specialism  not  broadly  based,  is  the  distinct  function, 
of  the  college  clearer,  or  has  it  rather  been  taken  on  by  the  other 
members  of  the  educational  system?  To  a  certain  extent,  m> 
doubt,  the  latter  is  true  and  ought  to  be  true. 

But  we  might  well  argue  for  college  education,  in  line  with 
the  more  practical  argument  already  made  for  secondary  educa- 
tion, that  the  highest  success  in  the  great  occupations  of  the- 
world's  work,  including  scientific  specialism,  requires  an  educa- 
tion preliminary  to  the  technical  training,  more  extended  not 
only,  but  of  a  broader  type  than  secondary  education  can  fur- 
nish. This  seems  commonly  granted  now  by  the  technical 
schools  themselves.  And  this  position  is  no  doubt  correct.  But 
is  this  the  chief  reason  for  college  education?  It  is  not  merely 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  on  the  world's  work  in  this  external 
sense  that  college  education  exists,  nor  does  this  sufficiently 
define  its  function.  The  college  does  not  look  beyond  to  the 
technical  or  professional  school,  or  to  the  university  proper  for 
its  justification ;  but  rather  is  itself  the  culmination  of  the  work 
that  at  least  ought  to  be  undertaken  by  the  public  schools. 

We  might,  therefore,  argue  again  and  more  truly,  probably, 
for  college  education,  in  line  with  the  other  argument  for  sec- 
ondary education;  that  the  world  needs  pre-eminently  the  lead- 
ership of  a  few  of  greater  social  efficiency  than  any  of  the  other 
types  of  education  by  their  necessary  limitations  are  able  to 
offer.  For  when  all  is  said  that  can  possibly  be  said  for  ele- 
mentary, secondary,  technical,  professional,  and  specialized  train- 
ing, what  still  do  the  world's  life  and  work  need?  All  these 
are  necessary,  but  obviously,  for  the  highest  life  of  society,  much 
more,  and  much  that  is  greater,  is  demanded.  Here  are  instruc- 
tion and  discipline,  technical  skill  and  professional  training,. 

[251 


and  heights  of  specialized  knowledge.  "But  where  shall  wisdom 
be  found,  and  where  is  the  place  of  understanding?"  The  ele- 
mentary school  saith,  It  is  not  in  me;  and  the  secondary  school 
saith,  It  is  not  with  me.  It  cannot  be  gotten  for  technical  skill, 
nor  shall  professional  success  be  weighed  for  the  price  thereof; 
it  cannot  be  valued  with  the  gain  of  the  specialist,  with  his  en- 
larged knowledge  or  his  discovery.  Whence  then  cometh  wis- 
dom, and  where  is  the  place  of  understanding? 

One  cannot  answer  that  question  by  raising  small  inquiries 
of  immediately  appreciable  gain.  Let  us  ask,  then,  the  largest 
questions  and  note  their  generally  admitted  answers.  Assum- 
ing that  the  world  and  life  are  not  wholly  irrational,  what  is 
the  best  we  can  say  concerning  the  meaning  of  the  earthly 
life?  What  is  the  goal  of  civilization?  What  is  the  danger  of 
the  American  nation?  What  are  the  greatest  needs  of  the  in- 
dividual man? 

The  wisdom  of  the  centuries  has  not  been  able  to  suggest 
a  better  meaning  for  the  earthly  life,  than  that  it  is  a  preliminary 
training  in  living  itself.  The  goal  of  civilization,  our  sociolo- 
gists tell  us,  is  a  rational,  ethical  democracy.  Our  political 
students  insist  that  the  foremost  danger  of  the  nation  is  the 
lack  of  the  spirit  of  social  service.  The  greatest  needs  of  the  in- 
dividual man  are  always  character,  happiness,  and  social  effi- 
ciency. If  these  are  even  approximately  correct  answers  to  our 
questions,  then  the  deepest  demands  to  be  made  upon  an  educa- 
tional system  are,  that,  so  far  as  it  may,  it  should  give  such  wis- 
dom in  living,  as  should  insure  character  and  happiness  to  the  in- 
dividual, and  that  spirit  of  social  service  that  should  make  men 
efficient  factors  in  bringing  on  the  coming  rational  and  ethical 
democracy. 

This  requires  that  somewhere  in  our  educational  system 
we  should  attack  the  problem  of  living  itself  and  of  social  serv- 
ice in  the  broadest  possible  way,  and  in  a  way  that  is  broader 
than  is  possible  to  either  the  elementary  or  secondary  school, 
though  neither  of  these  may  legitimately  shirk  this  task.  Just 
this,  then,  is  the  function  of  the  college:  to  teach  in  the  broadest 
way  the  fine  art  of  living,  to  give  the  best  preparation  that  or- 

[261 


ganized  education  can  give  for  entering  wisely  and  unselfishly 
into  the  complex  personal  relations  of  life,  and  for  furthering 
unselfishly  and  efficiently  social  progress.  As  distinguished  from 
the  other  forms  of  education,  it  has  no  primary  reference  to 
the  earning  of  a  living,  or  to  the  performance  of  some  specific 
task;  it  faces  the  problem  of  living  in  a  much  broader  and  more 
thoroughgoing  fashion;  it  does  not  specifically  aim  or  expect 
to  reach  all,  but  seeks  to  train  a  comparatively  small  self -selected 
number  who  shall  be  the  social  leaven  of  the  nation. 

If  the  task  so  set  the  college  seems  too  large,  let  us  re- 
member not  only  that  the  admitted  individual  and  social  goals 
require  no  less,  but  also  that  the  outcome  of  the  maturest  think- 
ing upon  man  and  his  relation  to  the  world,  indicates  that  the 
best  anywhere  can  be  attained  only  through  such  breadth  of  aim. 

For  if  we  seek  light  from  psychology,  we  are  confronted 
at  once  with  its  insistence  upon  the  complexity  of  life — the  re- 
latedness  of  all — and  upon  the  unity  of  man.  But  these  prin- 
ciples deny  point-blank  the  wisdom  of  an  education  exclusively 
intellectual,  and  require  rather,  that,  for  the  sake  of  the  intel- 
lect itself,  the  rest  of  life  and  the  rest  of  man  be  not  ignored.- 
Positively,  they  call  for  an  education  that  shall  be  broadly  in- 
clusive in  its  interests,  and  that  shall  appeal  to  the  entire  man. 

If  we  turn  to  sociology,  we  meet,  if  possible,  an  even 
stronger  emphasis  upon  the  complexity  of  life,  and  a  clear  de- 
mand that,  back  of  whatever  power  the  individual  may  have, 
there  should  lie  the  great  convictions  of  the  social  consciousness, 
that  imply  the  highest  moral  training,  and  set  one  face  to  face 
with  the  widest  social  and  political  questions.  No  narrow  edu- 
cation can  meet  the  sociological  test. 

And  if  we  ask  for  the  evidence  of  philosophy,  we  have  to 
note  that  its  most  characteristic  positions  today  in  metaphysics 
and  theory  of  knowledge — its  teleological  view  of  essence,  its 
insistence  that  the  function  of  knowledge  is  transitional,  and 
that  the  key  to  reality  is  the  whole  person — all  refute  a  purely 
intellectual  conception  of  education  and  logically  require  a 
broader  view  of  education  than  has  anywhere  commonly  pre- 
vailed. 

[27] 


And  if  as  a  Christian  people,  professing  to  find  our  highest 
ideals  in  the  Christian  religion,  we  seek  guidance  from  its  goal — 
that  all  men  should  live  as  obedient  sons  of  the  Heavenly 
Father  and  as  brothers  one  of  another — we  are  face  to  face 
.again  with  that  problem  of  the  complex  world  of  personal  rela- 
tions, that  cannot  be  solved  except  through  the  training  of  the 
entire  man. 

In  all  these  lines  of  psychological,  sociological,  philosophi- 
cal, and  Christian  thinking,  our  theories  are  right;  our  practice 
in  education  at  best  lags  far  behind.  Every  line  of  modern  think- 
ing is  a  fresh  insistence  upon  the  concrete  complexity  of  life  and 
upon  the  unity  of  man,  and  demands  an  education,  broad 
enough  to  meet  both.  Nothing  justifies  the  common  extraor- 
dinary emphasis  on  the  intellectual  as  the  one  aim  of  edu- 
cation. 

It  is  not,  then,  by  accident  that  we  speak  of  the  necessity  of 
a  liberal  education.  For  let  us  notice  that  even  on  the  intel- 
lectual side,  the  most  valuable  and  vital  qualities  cannot  be 
given  by  rule  or  by  any  narrow  technique.  The  supreme  de- 
mand is  for  what  we  call  sanity,  judgment,  common  sense, 
adaptability — all  different  names,  perhaps,  for  the  same  thing, 
namely,  ability  to  know  whether  a  given  case  is  to  be  treated 
.according  to  general  precedent — by  appeal  to  a  general  prin- 
ciple— or  decided  upon  its  individual  merits;  to  know  whether 
our  problem  is  one  of  classification,  or  one  of  more  thorough 
acquaintance  with  the  particular.  No  rules  or  methods  of  pro- 
cedure can  make  a  reasoner  or  an  investigator;  for  the  vital 
point  is  to  pick  out  of  a  new  situation  the  exact  element  in  it 
which  is  significant  for  the  purpose  in  hand.  The  case  cannot 
have  been  anticipated;  the  only  help  that  education  can  give  is 
through  much  practice  in  discrimination  and  assimilation,  and 
through  the  bestowal  of  a  wide  circle  of  interests,  aesthetic  and 
practical,  even  more  than  intellectual.  Interpretive  power  is 
similarly  conditioned,  and  calls  for  the  richest  life  in  the  in- 
terpreter. Even  the  scientific  spirit,  then, — the  most  valuable 
gift  of  a  scientific  training, — is  not  merely  intellectual.  Still  less 
;are  the  historical  spirit  and  the  philosophic  spirit  intellectually 


conferred ;  they  require  at  every  turn  the  use  of  the  key  of  the 
whole  man. 

And  we  certainly  have  a  right  to  ask  of  education  that  it 
bring  men  to  appreciation  of  the  great  values  of  life — what  else 
does  culture  mean? — to  aesthetic  taste  and  appreciation,  to 
moral  judgment  and  character,  to  the  capacity  for  friendship, 
to  religious  appreciation  and  response. 

But  if  we  have  a  right  to  demand  from  an  educational 
system  in  any  measure  these  qualities — judgment,  adaptability, 
discernment,  interpretive  power,  the  scientific,  historical,  and 
philosophical  spirit,  and  the  culture  adequate  to  enter  into  the 
great  spheres  of  value — aesthetic,  personal,  moral,  and  reli- 
gious,— it  is  evident  that  they  can  be  given  only  indirectly  and 
through  the  most  liberal  training.  Do  they  not  lie,  in  the  na- 
ture of  the  case,  quite  beyond  the  limits  of  elementary,  second- 
ary, professional,  or  specialistic  training,  and  constitute  the  great 
aims  of  college  education  ?  Is  there  anything  else  likely  to  take 
the  place  of  the  college  in  performing  this  greatest  educational 
work  ? 

It  will  hardly  be  contended  by  any,  I  judge,  that  technical 
or  professional  training,  for  the  very  reason  that  it  does  and 
must  aim  primarily  at  direct  preparation  for  a  particular  call- 
ing, can  give  with  any  adequacy  this  indirect  and  liberal  edu- 
cation. 

And  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  any  one  who  has  measured 
with  seriousness  the  greatness  of  the  need  of  which  we  have 
just  spoken,  and  the  breadth  of  the  education  required  to  meet 
the  need,  will  be  able  to  think  that  the  secondary  school,  even  if 
extended  two  years,  is,  or  can  be  made,  sufficient  to  the  task. 
For,  in  the  first  place,  it  is  only  reasonable  that  our  educational 
system  should  somewhere  recognize  the  special  significance  of  the 
transitional  character  of  the  period  of  later  youth,  and  definitely 
provide  for  it.  That  period  peculiarly  needs  the  kind  of  sepa- 
rate training  given  by  the  college,  with  its  increased  call  for  in- 
dependent action,  and  (as  compared  with  the  high  school)  its 
greater  possibility  of  bringing  all  sides  of  the  life  of  the  student 
under  some  common  and  unified  training.  Is  it  too  much  to 

[29] 


claim  that  the  college,  at  its  best,  has  proved  an  almost  ideal 
transition  from  the  stricter  supervision  of  the  secondary  school 
to  the  complete  individual  liberty  of  the  university  proper? 

Moreover,  it  is  quite  wide  of  the  mark  to  argue,  as  against 
the  need  of  the  college,  that  the  high-school  graduate  of  today 
has  often  done  as  much  work  in  many  lines  as  the  college  grad- 
uate of  fifty  years  ago.  That  may  be  true,  but  the  real  ques- 
tion is  this:  Is  he  proportionally  as  well  prepared  to  meet  the 
complex  demands  of  modern  life,  as  the  college  graduate  of  the 
older  time,  the  conditions  of  the  much  simpler  life  he  con- 
fronted? The  question,  in  other  words,  is  not  one  of  absolute 
attainment,  but  of  proportional  preparation  for  life;  nor  one  of 
amount  of  knowledge  merely,  but  of  adaptive  power.  In  edu- 
cation, we  are  least  of  all  at  liberty  to  ignore  the  increasing  com- 
plexity of  modern  civilization. 

But  the  decisive  reason,  after  all,  why  the  secondary  school 
cannot  take  the  place  of  the  college  is  this :  that  one  has  only  to 
review  the  list  of  qualities  required  for  the  completest  training 
for  living,  to  see  that  the  deepest  of  the  interests  involved  simply 
cannot  be  appreciated  at  the  secondary  school  age,  even  if  ex- 
tended two  years.  I  have  no  desire  to  underrate  the  attain- 
ments of  the  secondary  school  graduate,  but  I  cannot  forget 
that  the  true  scientific  spirit,  the  historical  spirit,  the  philosophi- 
cal spirit,  power  of  wise  adaptation,  and  appreciation  of  the 
greatest  spheres  of  value,  are  all  plants  of  slow  growth,  and 
necessarily  presuppose  a  certain  maturity  of  mind.  What  does 
the  whole  principle  of  psychological  adaptation  in  education 
mean  but  just  this,  that  you  cannot  wisely  overhasten  life's  own 
contribution?  It  seems  to  me  too  often  forgotten,  that  the  two 
later  years  which  it  is  sometimes  proposed  to  cut  off  from  the 
college  course  are  precisely  the  years,  which,  from  the  broader 
and  deeper  point  of  view,  can  least  of  all  be  spared.  Generally 
speaking,  you  simply  cannot  make  a  philosopher  of  a  sophomore. 
He  has  not  lived  enough.  In  like  manner,  the  key  to  the  great- 
est values  of  life  is  simply  not  yet  held  before  the  dawning,  at 
least,  of  some  real  maturity. 

Nor  do  statistics  as  to  age  seem  to  me  greatly  to  affect  the 


problem.  With  an  advancing  civilization,  the  period  of  youth 
for  women  certainly  has  been  generally  extended  with  real  gain ; 
probably  it  is  wisely  extended  for  both  men  and  women.  In  any 
case,  I  see  no  reason  for  believing  that  the  average  sophomore 
is  relatively  maturer  today  than  his  compeer  of  the  earlier  time. 

These  considerations  seem  to  me  sufficient  to  show  that  we 
have  no  good  reason  to  expect  the  secondary  school  to  take  the 
place  of  the  college. 

And  we  have  still  less  reason  to  expect  the  university  to 
take  the  place  of  the  college,  unless  college  and  university  are 
regarded  as  essentially  interchangeable  terms.  If  the  university 
proper  has  any  really  distinctive  function,  so  far  as  I  am  able 
to  see,  that  must  be  regarded  as  the  training  of  the  scientific 
specialist.  I  am  quite  ready  to  admit  and  to  assert,  that  even 
the  university  cannot  wisely  ignore  the  claims  of  citizenship; 
but  just  because  its  primary  aim  is  specific  and  limited,  its  recog- 
nition of  these  claims  must  be  almost  wholly  incidental — in 
spirit  and  atmosphere  rather  than  in  its  proper  training. 

The  university,  then,  properly  so-called,  cannot  do  the 
work  of  the  college,  first,  because  its  aim  is  distinctly  and  en- 
tirely intellectual ;  and,  second,  because  it  assumes,  with  some 
reason,  that  it  is  dealing  with  fully  mature  men,  in  whose  case 
any  imposition  of  conduct  and  ideals  would  be  out  of  place ;  and 
this  assumption  accentuates  still  further  its  strictly  intellectual 
aim.  But,  besides  this,  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  in  its 
exclusive  specialism,  the  university  lacks,  necessarily,  the  breadth 
of  aim  required  in  the  fullest  training  for  living,  and  quite  fails 
to  make  its  appeal  to  the  entire  man ;  and  so  shuts  out  both  in- 
dispensable interests  and  indispensable  training.  Even  on  the 
purely  intellectual  side,  for  the  very  reason  that  it  looks  to  spe- 
cialism in  each  line,  it  is  likely  quite  to  lack  those  general  courses 
that  even  the  specialist  needs  in  other  lines  than  his  own.  These 
three  essential  differences,  then, — the  purely  intellectual  aim, 
the  assumption  of  the  maturity  of  its  students,  and  its  exclusive 
specialism, — make  the  atmosphere  of  the  university  distinctly 
different  from  that  of  the  college,  and  make  it  impossible  that  it 
should  ever  do  the  work  of  the  older  college. 

[311 


In  fact,  it  is  hardly  too  much  to  say  that  the  greatest  losses 
that  college  education  has  suffered  are  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
attempt  has  been  mistakenly  made  to  carry  over  the  spirit  of 
the  university  into  the  college.  As  American  educators  awak- 
ened only  slowly  to  the  true  conception  of  the  university  proper, 
and  then,  with  the  natural  enthusiasm  of  a  new-found  ideal, 
exaggerated  the  value  of  the  university's  function,  the  college 
and  university  ideals  were  naturally  confused,  and  the  true  col- 
lege ideal  almost  lost  in  the  process.  Many  circumstances  have 
favored  this  tendency.  The  confusion  was  real  and  honest. 
Colleges  were  growing  into  universities.  Many  changes  in 
college  education  itself  were  necessary.  But  the  greatest  dam- 
age was  done,  simply  because  the  colleges  were  cowardly  in  the 
face  of  unwise  and  ill-founded  criticism  made  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  university,  and  were  either  ashamed  to  resist  the  ex- 
clusively intellectual  trend,  or  lazily  unwilling  to  keep  the  in- 
creasingly difficult  responsibility  of  the  broader  college  training. 

As  a  natural  consequence,  many  of  our  colleges  and  uni- 
versities have  presented  the  anomalous  condition  of  being  filled 
with  students  who  claimed  both  the  liberty  of  men  and  the  ir- 
responsibility of  boys.  Naturally,  too,  aside  from  sham  univer- 
sities, those  colleges  have  been  in  most  danger  in  this  respect  of 
losing  true  college  ideals,  that  have  been  in  closest  connection 
with  the  university,  especially  where  the  same  courses  and  in- 
structors and  methods  and  discipline  and  aims  have  served  both 
college  and  university.  Courses  admirably  adapted  for  the  ex- 
clusive specialist  may  be  quite  unprofitable  as  the  chief  pabulum 
of  a  college  course:  and  a  method  of  treatment,  not  only  justi- 
fied, but  almost  demanded  in  dealing  with  really  mature  men, 
may  be  quite  inadequate  and  unwarranted  for  the  student 
whose  ideals  are  in  flux,  and  the  appeal  of  whose  entire  per- 
sonality no  instructor  has  a  right  to  ignore.  "Is  not  the  life 
more  than  meat?  and  the  body  than  raiment?"  The  college 
needs  much  more  than  a  highly  trained  specialist  in  the  teach- 
er's chair;  it  can  never  spare,  without  disastrous  loss,  the  close 
personal  touch  of  mature  men  of  marked  interest  in  the  wide 
range  of  the  life  of  others,  and  with  character-begetting  power. 

[32] 


And  ft  cannot  spare  a  real  training  that  is  far  more  than  intel- 
lectual. Indeed,  if  I  understand  President  Butler  aright,  in  his 
tentative  suggestion  of  halving  the  college  course,  it  is  exactly 
the  state  of  the  universitized  college  that  has  made  him  regard 
the  halving  of  its  course  as  no  great  disaster.  The  suggestion 
would  seem  warranted,  however,  only  if  we  must  regard  the 
cause  of  the  college  as  already  lost,  and  count  it  hopeless  that 
either  educators  or  the  public  should  be  again  awakened  to  the 
priceless  value  of  the  work  of  the  true  college. 

Nor  do  I  believe  that,  with  whatever  losses,  the  college  has 
quite  failed  to  give  the  liberal  training  required.  Many  a  col- 
lege teacher  can  confirm  from  his  own  repeated  observation 
President  Wilson's  words:  "Raw  lads  are  made  men  of  by 
the  mere  sweep  of  their  lives  through  the  various  schools  of  ex- 
perience. It  is  this  very  sweep  of  life  that  we  wish  to  bring  to 
the  consciousness  of  young  men  by  the  shorter  processes  of  the 
college.  We  have  seen  the  adaptation  take  place ;  we  have  seen 
crude  boys  made  fit  in  four  years  to  become  men  of  the  world." 

Mistakes,  no  doubt,  have  been  made,  serious  losses  sus- 
tained, and  there  are  grave  dangers  to  be  guarded  against  in  all 
our  colleges.  The  utilities  have  been  over-insistent ;  the  aim  has 
been  too  merely  intellectual;  specialism  has  claimed  too  much; 
the  standpoint  and  method  of  the  university  have  prevailed  to 
an  extent  quite  beyond  reasonable  defense;  and,  in  consequence, 
at  multiplied  places  the  rights  of  the  entire  personality  have 
been  ignored. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  no  mere  reaction  to  the  older  col- 
lege is  either  desirable  or  possible.  Men  came  to  see  that  they 
were  in  a  new  world  that  required  for  wise  and  fruitful  living 
a  broader  curriculum  than  the  older  college  ever  afforded.  A 
change  here  was  inevitable. 

So,  too,  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  there  was  needed 
greater  emphasis  on  a  close  and  living  and  practical  relation  to 
the  actual  world ;  fuller  recognition  of  the  meaning  of  hard,  hon- 
est, intellectual  work,  and  of  the  sound  psychological  basis  of 
the  laboratory  and  seminar  methods;  a  better  adaptation  to  dif- 
fering individuals;  and,  for  the  very  sake  of  greater  power  in  the 


more  general  courses,  a  real  approach  to  something  like  spe- 
cialism in  at  least  one  line  of  study.  In  all  these  important  re- 
spects, the  changes  toward  the  newer  college  have  been  not 
only  practically  justified  but  thoroughly  right. 

Now,  is  it  possible  to  combine  the  gains  of  the  new  with 
the  indisputable  advantages  of  the  old?  What  changes  in  the 
present  situation  are  demanded,  if  the  true  function  of  the 
college  is  to  be  completely  fulfilled?  The  present  lack  seems 
to  me  plainly  to  lie  in  the  comparative  neglect  of  the  entire  per- 
sonality. How  are  these  needs  of  the  complete  personality  to 
be  met  in  education?  What  are  the  means,  and  what  is  the 
spirit  required? 

The  direct  study  of  human  nature  in  its  constitution  and 
in  the  relations  of  society  ought  to  enable  one  to  answer  these 
questions  with  some  precision.  In  other  words,  if  college  edu- 
cation has  really  the  broad  function  that  has  been  ascribed  to 
it,  it  ought  to  be  able  to  meet  a  psychological  and  sociological 
test.  Modern  psychology — with  what  seems  to  me  its  pre- 
eminent fourfold  insistence,  upon  the  complexity  of  life,  the 
unity  of  man,  the  central  importance  of  will  and  action,  and 
the  concreteness  of  the  real,  involving  a  personal  and  a  social 
emphasis — has  its  clear  suggestions.  And  modern  sociology,  too, 
with  its  demand  for  a  social  consciousness  that  shall  be  charac- 
terized by  the  threefold  conviction  of  the  essential  likeness  of 
men,  of  the  mutual  influence  of  men,  and  of  the  value  and 
sacredness  of  the  person,  has  its  definite  counsel.  The  proper 
fulfillment  of  the  function  of  the  college,  this  seems  to  indicate, 
requires  as  its  great  means,  first,  a  life  sufficiently  complex  to 
give  acquaintance  with  the  great  fundamental  facts  of  the  world, 
and  to  call  out  the  entire  man;  second,  the  completest  possible 
expressive  activity  on  the  part  of  the  student;  and,  third,  per- 
sonal association  with  broad  and  wise  and  noble  lives.  And  the 
corresponding  spirit  demanded  in  college  education  must  be, 
first,  broad  and  catholic  in  both  senses, — as  responding  to  a 
wide  range  of  interests,  and  looking  to  the  all-around  develop- 
ment of  the  individual;  second,  objective  rather  than  self-cen- 
tered and  introspective ;  and,  third,  imbued  with  the  fundamental 

[34] 


convictions  of  the  social  consciousness.  These  are  always  the 
greatest  and  the  alone  indispensable  means  and  conditions  in  a 
complete  education,  and  they  contain  in  themselves  the  great 
sources  of  character,  of  happiness,  and  of  social  efficiency.  The 
supreme  opportunity,  in  other  words,  that  a  college  education 
should  offer,  is  opportunity  to  use  one's  full  powers  in  a  wisely 
chosen,  complex  environment,  in  association  with  the  best; — and 
all  this  in  an  atmosphere,  catholic  in  its  interests,  objective  in 
spirit  and  method,  and  democratic,  unselfish,  and  finely  reverent 
in  its  personal  relations.  Such  an  ideal  definitely  combines  the 
best  of  both  the  older  and  the  newer  college.  And  the  colleges 
that  most  completely  fulfill  this  ideal  have,  I  judge,  a  work 
which  is  beyond  price,  and  without  possible  substitute. 

Before  passing  to  the  discussion  of  the  means  and  spirit 
demanded  in  a  true  college  education,  a  word  further  concern- 
ing the  relation  of  the  college  to  the  professional  training  seems 
desirable.  In  this  whole  problem  of  the  possible  shortening  of 
the  college  course  for  the  sake  of  students  looking  to  professional 
studies,  several  things  need  to  be  kept  closely  in  mind  if  confu- 
sion is  to  be  avoided. 

In  the  first  place,  if  the  professional  course  is  a  full  rigorous 
four-year  course,  this  ought  to  mean,  and  usually  does  mean, 
that  it  has  been  laid  out  on  somewhat  broad  and  liberal  lines, 
and  not  with  reference  to  mere  narrow  technique.  And  the 
student  who  is  to  continue  his  study  through  such  a  course 
can  more  easily  afford  to  abridge  the  time  given  to  the  two 
courses. 

This  same  broadening  of  the  professional  course,  more- 
over, makes  possible  an  entirely  legitimate  adjustment  to  the 
coming  professional  study  on  the  part  of  the  college.  In  every 
broadly  planned  professional  course  of  four  years,  there  is  quite 
certain  to  be  at  least  a  year  of  work  of  so  liberal  a  character 
that  it  may  justly  be  counted  toward  both  the  college  and  the 
professional  degree.  And  the  colleges  which  can  offer  such 
work  of  first  quality  for  the  different  professions  can  meet 
squarely  and  strongly  every  legitimate  demand  for  abridging  the 
entire  period  of  study;  and  can  then,  in  all  probability,  in  the 

[35] 


great  majority  of  cases,  render  a  better  service  to  the  student 
himself,  to  the  professional  school,  and  to  society,  by  retaining 
the  student  in  the  atmosphere  of  the  college  through  his  full 
four  years. 

It  is  further  to  be  noted  that  in  any  case  this  reason  for 
shortening  college  courses  holds  only  for  such  professional  stu- 
dents. For  the  majority  of  college  students,  including  almost 
all  the  women,  such  shortening  is  not  called  for,  and  would  be 
only  a  calamity.  Even  the  smallest  real  colleges,  therefore, 
that  can  do  very  little  in  the  way  of  adjustment  to  professional 
courses,  and  that  may  have  to  lose  many,  perhaps  most,  of  those 
looking  to  professional  work,  would  still  have  their  former  most 
important  service  to  render  for  the  majority  of  their  students. 

Moreover,  it  seems  to  me  wholly  probable  that  a  good  pro- 
portion of  the  very  ablest  and  clearest-sighted  of  those  going 
into  the  professions,  will  still  choose  not  to  deprive  themselves 
of  the  very  best  the  college  can  give  them,  and  will  therefore 
prefer  not  to  specialize  in  college  in  precisely  those  subjects  to 
which  the  larger  part  of  all  their  later  study  in  any  case  must 
be  devoted.  And,  through  specialization  in  other  lines,  such  ex- 
ceptional students  will  look  forward  confidently  to  a  larger  life 
and  a  higher  professional  success  than  could  otherwise  come  to 
them.  These  wisest  students  will  certainly  not  wish  to  sacri- 
fice acquaintance  with  the  natural  great  broad  human  subjects 
of  the  last  year  in  college  to  professional  specialization.  And 
even  those  students  who  feel  compelled  to  abridge  their  entire 
period  of  study,  if  they  are  wise,  will  so  scatter  their  prelim- 
inary professional  study  through  their  college  course,  as  to  in- 
sure that  at  least  a  part  of  their  maturest  time  in  college  may 
be  given  to  those  great  subjects,  like  philosophy,  that  require 
some  real  maturity  of  mind  to  be  most  profitably  taken.  I  do 
not  believe  that  the  proper  demands  of  both  liberal  and  profes- 
sional training  can  be  met  where  it  is  attempted  to  cover  both 
courses  in  six  years.  Even  where  the  requisite  subjects  are  all 
covered  by  brilliant  students  the  value  of  the  outcome  may  well 
be  doubted.  It  is  not  to  be  forgotten  that  it  is  time,  and  some 
real  sense  of  leisure,  and  opportunity  to  take  in  the  full  signifi- 


cance  of  one's  studies  and  to  knit  them  up  with  the  rest  of  one's 
thinking  and  living — it  is  just  these  things  that  distinguish 
real  education  from  cramming. 

II.       THE    GREAT    MEANS    IN    COLLEGE    EDUCATION. 

A.  A  Complex  Life. — And,  first,  the  college  must  furnish 
a  life  sufficiently  complex  to  insure  to  the  student  a  wide  circle 
of  interests,  and  to  call  out  his  entire  personality. 

Aside  from  its  psychological  basis,  justification  for  this 
prime  emphasis  on  breadth  in  college  education  is  everywhere  at 
hand.  For  philosophy  has  practically  to  recognize,  even  when 
it  does  not  theoretically  and  directly  assert,  that  "to  be  is  to  be 
in  relations."  Science  cannot  forget  that  as  the  scale  of  life 
rises,  there  must  be  correspondence  to  a  more  complex  environ- 
ment. The  philosophical  historian  finds  the  main  safeguard 
against  the  retrogression  of  the  race  in  an  increasing  self-control, 
due  to  the  steady  pressure  of  great  and  many-sided  objective 
forces  organized  in  institutions,  laws,  customs,  and  education. 
The  supreme  educational  counsel,  and  the  secret  of  full  mental 
wakefulness  both  seem  often  to  be  found  in  concentration  upon 
relations.  Our  follies  usually  go  back  to  the  ignoring  of  some 
relation  or  other  of  the  matter  in  hand.  And  it  is  not  difficult 
to  show  that  our  world,  our  experience,  our  sanity,  our  free- 
dom, and  our  influence, — all  depend  in  no  small  degree  on  the 
largeness  of  our  circle  of  interests;  while  simple  understanding 
of  our  complex  modern  civilization  alone  requires  great  breadth 
in  training. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  such  breadth  of  education  is  at- 
tended by  serious  dangers  of  over-sophistication  and  pessimism 
through  loss  of  convictions  and  ideals.  And  yet  the  breadth  is 
to  be  welcomed ;  for  the  remedy  is  not  in  less  breadth,  but  in 
more  breadth.  For  breadth  certainly  does  not  mean  the  nar- 
rowness of  ignoring  the  results  of  experience.  It  is  a  false  lib- 
erality that  treats  with  equal  respect  exploded  and  verified 
hypotheses.  The  entire  lack  of  prejudice  upon  which  some  so 
pride  themselves  is  curiously  akin  to  stupid  and  obstinate  folly. 
Some  things  have  been  proved  in  the  history  of  the  race. 

[  37] 


Nor  does  breadth  mean  the  abandonment  of  all  discrim- 
ination in  values — putting  all  values  on  a  dead  level.  It  is  a 
strange  reversal  of  scientific  estimates,  that  turns  unscientific 
lack  of  discrimination  into  science's  broad  openness  to  light. 
There  are  many  points  of  view,  but  they  are  not  therefore  all 
of  equal  importance.  The  noble  virtue  of  tolerance  is  not  pos- 
sible to  such  cheap  and  easy  indifrerentism.  Only  the  man  of 
convictions  and  ideals,  with  a  strong  sense  of  the  difference  of 
values,  can  be  tolerant,  for  only  he  cares.  The  view  of  any 
single  individual  is  no  doubt  limited ;  but  the  point  of  view 
which  results  from  the  gradual  and  careful  cancellation  of  the 
limitations  of  many  minds,  is  more  than  an  individual  view. 

Nor,  once  more,  does  breadth  mean  a  narrow  intellectual- 
ism,  for  if  we  can  trust  the  indications  of  our  intellect,  we 
ought  to  be  able  to  trust  the  indications  of  the  rest  of  our 
nature;  and  in  any  case  the  only  possible  key  and  standard  of 
truth  and  reality  are  in  ourselves — the  whole  self — and  the  so- 
called  "necessities  of  thought"  become,  thus,  necessities  of  a 
reason  which  means  loyally  to  take  account  of  all  the  data  of  the 
entire  man. 

Obviously,  then,  no  attempt  at  mere  reaction  to  simpler 
conditions  will  avail  in  education.  Indeed,  we  cannot  return 
to  them  if  we  would;  though  the  temptation  to  do  so  is  often 
real  enough.  But,  even  if  the  return  were  possible,  it  would 
mean  nothing  less  than  a  declaration  that  our  Christian  ideals 
cannot  conquer  a  complex  situation.  This  would  be  really  to 
give  up  the  whole  battle;  for  we  have  not  only  found  reason 
fully  to  justify  the  greatest  breadth  on  general  grounds,  but  the 
ideal  interests  themselves  suffer  from  any  spirit  of  exclusive- 
ness.  Human  nature  certainly  avenges  itself  for  any  attempted 
disregard  of  the  wide  range  of  its  interests;  and,  in  truth,  the 
denial  of  legitimate  worldly  interests  only  limits  the  possible 
sphere  of  morality  and  religion.  It  is  for  just  this  reason  that 
the  separation  of  the  sacred  and  secular  is  the  heresy  of  here- 
sies. The  simplicity  to  be  sought  lies — not  in  environment — 
but  in  a  spirit  that,  having  great  convictions  and  great  ideals, 
clearly  discriminates  the  greater  from  the  less,  and  unhesitatingly 

[38] 


subordinates  all  relative  goods.  This  insures  that  singleness  of 
aim  that  makes  the  genuinely  simple  and  transparent  life.  It  is 
a  spirit  that  can  recognize  the  full  value  of  the  material  in  its 
place,  but  with  the  clear  vision  that  "a  man's  life  consisteth 
not  in  the  abundance  of  the  things  which  he  possesseth"  will  not 
allow  itself  to  be  absorbed  in  the  "passion  for  material  comfort." 
The  simplicity  of  high  ideals,  consistently  and  resolutely  pur- 
sued, is  possible  to  any  college  in  the  very  midst  of  the  most 
varied  interests.  And  only  such  a  simplicity  can  conquer  in 
the  end. 

The  college,  of  course,  must  meet  these  demands  for  breadth 
of  training  by  the  wide  range  of  its  studies  and  of  its  interests. 
In  its  studies  it  aims  to  let  the  student  share  in  the  world's  best 
inheritance  in  each  of  the  great  realms  of  human  thinking.  I 
need  not  repeat  the  often  given  argument  for  the  different 
studies  to  be  recognized  in  a  liberal  training.  It  will  include 
the  older  and  newer  studies,  mathematics,  ancient  and  modern 
languages  and  literatures,  natural  science,  history,  economics  and 
sociology,  philosophy,  and  physical  training.  And  it  seems  to 
me  hardly  open  to  question  that  it  ought  to  provide  courses  that 
shall  prove  valuable  introductions  to  the  intelligent  appreciation 
of  music  and  of  art,  as  well  as  of  literature.  These  studies  will 
represent  all  the  great  classes  of  facts  in  the  midst  of  which 
every  man  must  live,  and  afford  the  full  range  of  fundamental 
educational  values.  But  liberal  training  need  not  mean  neces- 
sarily, I  think,  large  numbers  of  greatly  detailed  courses;  nor 
for  any  one  man  acquaintance  with  all  branches  of  natural 
science.  The  scientific  spirit  it  must  give,  with  the  involved  some- 
what thorough  knowledge  of  at  least  one  science.  The  study 
of  material  objects  has  great  advantages  for  the  scientific  spirit 
and  method  over  the  study  of  any  other  objects;  but  we  are  not 
at  liberty  to  forget  that  our  primary  relation  in  life  is,  never- 
theless, not  to  things  but  to  persons. 

But  in  any  case  the  interests  of  the  college  must  be  wider 
than  the  curriculum.  It  is  only  a  part  of  our  excessive  intel- 
lectualism  that  it  is  so  often  assumed  that  the  curriculum  makes 
the  college.  Some  of  the  most  important  interests  in  a  liberal 


education  can  be  best  met  only  indirectly.  Surroundings,  or- 
ganization, discipline,  and  atmosphere  may  here  count  for  more 
than  definite  instruction.  We  have  the  needs  of  the  entire 
man — physical,  intellectual,  aesthetic,  social,  moral,  and  reli- 
gious— to  meet  in  a  truly  liberal  education.  The  intellectual 
needs  can  doubtless  be  met  more  easily  and  directly  in  the  cur- 
riculum than  any  of  the  others;  but  none  of  them  may  be  ig- 
nored without  serious  loss. 

Physical  education  makes  its  rightful  claim  upon  the  col- 
lege. The  college  must  not  only  talk  about  the  sound  mind  in 
the  sound  body,  but  do  something  really  to  secure  that  sound 
body  for  its  students.  It  must  not  only  thoroughly  recognize 
in  its  psychological  teaching  the  intimate  way  in  which  body 
and  mind  are  knit  up  together,  the  physical  basis  of  habit,  the 
critical  importance  of  surplus  nervous  energy,  the  influence  of 
physical  training  upon  the  brain  centers,  and  the  close  connec- 
tion of  the  will  with  muscular  activity;  but  if  it  really  believes 
these  things,  it  must  practically  recognize  them  in  the  organi- 
zation of  its  work.  This  means,  not  only,  that  there  must  be 
scrupulous  care  about  sanitary  conditions,  careful  supervision 
of  the  health  of  students  by  thoroughly  trained  physicians,  and 
general  hygienic  instruction,  but  such  scientifically  planned 
and  graded  courses  in  physical  training  as  shall  deserve  to  count 
as  real  education  on  the  same  basis  as  laboratory  courses.  Un- 
less our  modern  psychology  is  wholly  wrong,  such  physical  edu- 
cation that  can  be  applied  to  all  students,  has  a  great  contribu- 
tion to  make,  not  only  in  health  and  in  the  systematic  develop- 
ment of  the  body,  but  intellectually  and  volitionally  as  well. 

If  athletics  are  to  make  their  true  contribution  to  the  col- 
lege life — and  a  most  valuable  contribution  that  may  be — a  wide 
range  of  sports  must  be  encouraged  that  shall  enlist  a  great 
portion  of  the  students,  and  not  merely  a  small  number  of  spe- 
cially athletic  men;  and  the  spirit  of  genuine  play  must  be 
brought  back  into  all  college  so-called  sports.  They  have  their 
most  valuable  office,  it  should  never  be  forgotten,  not  as  serious 
business  or  money-making  enterprises,  but  simply  as  play.  A 
relative  good  becomes  a  serious  evil,  when  it  is  allowed  to  over- 

[40] 


top  greater  values;  but  in  its  place  it  contributes  to  the  sanity 
and  health  of  all  other  interests.  Such  a  contribution,  I  have 
no  doubt,  athletics  have  it  in  their  power  to  make,  and  to  a  con- 
siderable extent  do  make  even  now;  and  physical  education,  as- 
a  whole,  demands  greater  attention  from  the  college. 

The  universally  recognized  demand  of  the  intellectual  in 
college  education  needs  no  argument. 

The  fact  that  man  is  as  truly  an  esthetic  being,  as  phy- 
sical and  intellectual,  the  college  has  less  often  sufficiently  recog- 
nized. But  if  it  is  the  mission  of  a  liberal  training  to  produce 
the  man  of  culture,  it  can  hardly  refuse  to  furnish,  in  some 
form,  ability  to  appreciate  the  great  aesthetic  realms  of  literature, 
music,  and  art.  What  it  already  does  in  large  measure  for  lit- 
erature, it  ought  also  to  do  for  music  and  art.  We  must  not 
forget  the  kinship  of  the  aesthetic  with  the  still  higher  values, 
and  its  own  large  contribution  to  the  sanity  and  happiness  of 
life.  The  college  cannot  wisely  ignore  this  need  of  man.  Doubt- 
less, the  real  need  cannot  be  fully  nor  perhaps  chiefly  met  in 
courses  or  in  their  equipment.  The  college  needs  to  be  able  to 
put  its  students  to  such  extent  as  is  possible  in  the  presence  of 
the  best  in  these  realms,  and  to  permeate  the  common  life  of  each 
student  with  something  of  the  beautiful.  It  is  no  small  service, 
which  is  so  rendered.  Music  has  certain  great  advantages  in 
this  respect,  especially  in  a  coeducational  institution. 

And  certainly,  unless  one  denies  the  legitimacy  of  the  very 
aim — social  efficiency — with  which  either  the  state  or  the  church 
enters  upon  the  work  of  education  at  all,  the  place  of  the  social 
and  moral  in  college  education  cannot  be  questioned.  Men  may 
differ  as  to  the  best  way  of  meeting  these  needs ;  they  can  hardly 
differ  as  to  their  imperative  claim  upon  any  education  that  is  to 
be  called  liberal.  No  let-alone  policy  here  is  enough.  The 
moral  in  its  broadest  scope  should  be  a  clearly  recognized  part 
of  college  education — to  be  most  wisely  and  considerately  done, 
no  doubt,  with  all  possible  recognition  of  the  moral  initiative  of 
the  pupil — but  to  be  done,  nevertheless.  Much  talk  upon  this 
point  seems  to  make  the  most  singular  assumption  that  the  only 
real  necessity  in  that  finest  and  most  delicate  of  all  worlds,  the 

[41  ] 


world  of  personal  relations,  is  moral  backbone;  and  that  a  sit- 
uation that  tends  to  develop  that  is  doing  all  that  can  be  asked 
for  moral  education.  But  what  of  aims  and  ideals  and  wisest 
means  in  all  this?  What  of  that  sensitive  moral  judgment,  and 
creative  imagination,  and  deep  sense  of  the  meaning  of  life, 
without  which  no  high  moral  attainment  can  be  made?  What 
right  have  we  indifferently  to  let  things  take  their  course 
here?  This  is  nothing  less  than  to  give  the  student  a  shove 
downward ;  for  other  influences  do  not  keep  their  hands  off  in 
the  meantime.  What  else  is  the  object  of  education,  but  to  make 
a  man  all  around  a  better  man  than  he  would  have  otherwise 
naturally  become? 

And,  once  more,  unless  one  is  ready  to  deny  altogether  the 
value  of  the  function  of  religion  in  the  life  of  men,  the  religious 
need  also  deserves  recognition  in  some  way  in  any  education 
that  is  to  be  called  complete.  Any  ideal  view  of  life,  such  as 
a  broad  education  must  itself  assume,  virtually  implies  a  faith 
in  the  rationality  of  the  world  which  is  practically  religious.  It 
is  shallow  thinking  that  imagines  that  religious  faith  is  a  matter 
of  small  concern,  and  easily  to  be  set  aside.  If,  as  Emerson 
tells  us,  any  high  friendship  transfigures  the  world  for  us,  cer- 
tainly there  is  no  such  contributor  to  peace  and  joy  as  a  real 
faith  in  God.  And  ethical  earnestness  and  social  efficiency,  no 
less  than  happiness,  surely  find  their  strongest  support  in  a  re- 
ligious faith.  Why  should  the  man  of  ethical  earnestness  be- 
lieve that  he  is  more  in  earnest  to  be  honest  and  kind  than  the 
Source  of  all  whence  he  has  come?  Is  man  indeed  himself  the 
Highest?  And  what  rational  defense  has  any  man  for  the  en- 
thusiasm with  which  he  throws  himself  either  into  his  own 
calling,  or  into  work  for  social  progress,  who  cannot  believe 
that  in  both  he  is  working  in  line  with  the  eternal  forces,  and 
that  a  plan  greater  than  his  own  encircles  all  his  plans  and 
makes  effective  all  the  bits  of  his  striving  ?  None  of  us  are  going 
seriously  and  enthusiastically  to  attempt  to  dip  out  the  ocean 
with  a  cup.  And  if  we  really  believe  in  the  value  of  our  call- 
ing, or  of  our  own  social  endeavor,  whether  we  recognize  it  or 
not,  our  belief  is  at  bottom  a  genuinely  religious  faith.  Man 

[42] 


is  inevitably  a  religious  being.  For  this  very  reason,  too,  a  pe- 
culiar responsibility  is  laid  upon  education.  For  this  means 
that  some  kind  of  religious  life  and  thought  every  man  is  bound 
to  have;  the  only  question  is,  whether  that  religious  life  and 
thought  shall  be  well  considered  and  adequate. 

Either  the  function  of  religion  is  much  less  than  the  great 
majority  of  the  more  thoughtful  of  mankind  have  always 
thought,  or  the  religious  need  of  men  deserves  to  be  met  in  edu- 
cation without  apology  and  with  an  effectiveness  seldom  found. 
It  concerns  a  people  to  know  whether  its  educational  system  is 
helping  to  an  intelligent  and  genuine  religious  life.  So  great  a 
need  as  this  will  not  take  care  of  itself.  Where  is  it  being  ade- 
quately met  today?  Few  things  are  more  discouraging  than  the) 
large  amount  of  surprisingly  unintelligent  Christianity  in  sup-J 
posably  educated  men.  How  many  of  our  college  graduates  have 
really  awakened,  for  example,  to  the  significance  of  the  serious 
self-limitation  of  philosophy  in  its  setting  outside  its  field  the 
great  facts  of  Christian  history? 

It  is  a  chief  aim  of  a  liberal  education — is  it  not? — to  bring 
a  man  to  true  culture — to  ability  to  enter  into  all  values  with  ap- 
preciation and  conviction.  And  all  values — all  the  marvelous 
content  of  literature  and  music  and  art — we  may  not  forget,  are 
but  the  revelation  of  the  riches  of  some  personal  life.  All 
values  go  back  ultimately  to  persons.  And  the  highest  achieve- 
ment of  culture  is  the  understanding  and  appreciation  of  the 
great  personalities.  And  the  Christian  religion,  therefore,, 
makes  its  rightful  appeal  to  the  truly  cultivated  man  in  the  tran- 
scendent person  of  its  Founder.  May  not  the  college  be  asked 
to  send  out  men  sufficiently  cultured  to  be  able  to  appreciate 
that  transcendent  person  of  history? 

Doubtless,  in  many  of  our  institutions  the  use  of  anything 
like  definite  religious  instruction  and  motive  by  the  institution 
itself  is  necessarily  excluded.  Even  so,  it  means  a  limitation  in 
the  education,  which  is  to  be  made  good  so  far  as  possible  bjr 
other  agencies.  The  necessity  of  these  situations  is,  however, 
by  no  means  to  be  made  into  a  prescription  for  all  otheis.  And 
the  teacher  may  well  rejoice,  wTho,  in  the  midst  of  his  teaching,  is. 

[43] 


free  to  give  utterance  to  his  deepest  and  most  significant  convic- 
tions. 

In  general,  those  colleges  will  best  meet  the  demands  for 
breadth  of  education,  that  are  most  free  and  best  organized  to 
meet  the  entire  range  of  human  interests.  The  advantage  here 
lies  in  part  with  the  larger  and  in  part  with  the  smaller  in- 
stitutions. 

In  all  cases,  with  whatever  inevitable  limitations  of  situa- 
tion, it  must  at  least  be  demanded  that  the  spirit  pervading  the 
•college  should  be  heartily,  though  discriminatingly,  catholic. 
There  should  be,  certainly,  no  vaunting  of  our  limitations.  And 
this  discriminating  breadth  of  view,  it  should  be  noticed,  in  its 
recognition  of  the  complexity  of  life,  and  of  the  unity  of  man,  if 
truly  interpreted,  itself  affords  moral  support ;  for  it  furnishes  a 
motive  against  mere  impulse,  and  helps  directly  to  that  delibera- 
tion which  is  the  secret  of  self-control ;  and,  because  it  believes 
that  all  life  is  so  knit  up  together,  is  also  strenuous  counsel 
against  deterioration  at  any  point. 

Beyond  this  breadth  in  interest  and  appeal,  the  great  reli- 
.ance  of  an  education  that  is  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  entire  man 
must  be,  as  we  have  seen,  upon  making  all  possible  use  of  ex- 
pressive activity  on  the  part  of  the  student,  and  of  personal  as- 
sociation. 

B.  Expressive  Activity. — And,  first,  if  the  "voluntaristic 
trend"  in  modern  psychology  has  any  justification,  if  in  body  and 
mind  we  are  really  made  for  action,  if  for  the  very  sake  of 
thought  and  feeling  we  must  act,  then  any  soundly  based  educa- 
tion must  everywhere  make  much  of  the  will  and  of  action,  must 
in  all  departments  of  its  training  of  the  individual — physical, 
intellectual,  aesthetic,  social,  moral,  and  religious — specifically 
seek  expressive  activity. 

This  goes  without  saying  in  physical  education,  and  it  is 
just  at  that  point  that  physical  education  has  its  greatest  con- 
tribution to  make  to  all  other  training.  And  the  educational 
value  of  earning  one's  way  in  college  is  not  to  be  overlooked 
just  here.  It  is  easy  to  overdo  the  amount  of  direct  financial 
aid  to  students.  It  is  not  the  ministry  alone,  as  seems  often 

[  44] 


gratuitously  assumed,  that  suffers  in  this  respect.  In  spite  of 
the  temptation  of  a  short-sighted  competition  that  sets  colleges 
to  bidding  against  one  another  for  students,  it  remains  true  that 
,no  college  that  aims  at  the  highest  results  can  afford  to  ignore 
.social  axioms  in  giving  its  beneficiary  aid.  Care  by  the  college  in 
providing  opportunities  for  self-help  is  the  very  best  form  of  aid. 
For  such  aid  does  not  pauperize,  but  calls  out  useful  active  serv- 
ice from  the  student  himself.  But  the  possibilities  of  develop- 
ment in  this  direction  depend  very  largely  on  the  fidelity  of 
students.  Each  student  generation  holds  a  trust  in  this  respect 
for  the  next  generation. 

The  principle  has  already  been  widely  recognized  in  intel- 
lectual training  in  many  of  the  changes  of  the  newer  education — 
In  the  introduction  of  laboratory  and  seminar  methods,  and  in 
the  extension  of  these  methods  so  far  as  possible  to  all  subjects  of 
:study,  and  specifically  in  the  revolution  of  the  teaching  of 
English  composition.  But  this  principle  of  the  fundamental 
need  of  expressive  activity  deserves  ever-widening  recognition, 
as  a  real  guiding  principle  even  in  intellectual  teaching.  The 
•pupil's  own  activity  is  to  be  called  out  at  every  point ;  the  fullest, 
•clearest,  and  most  accurate  expression  of  his  thought  in  speech, 
in  writing,  and,  wherever  possible,  in  action,  is  to  be  sought. 
Even  our  ideas  are  not  ours  until  we  have  expressed  them,  and 
they  are  more  perfectly  ours,  the  more  perfect  the  expression. 
'The  old-fashioned  recitation,  when  well  conducted,  had  a  real 
Aground  of  justification,  and  no  lecturing  by  the  teacher  can  fully 
replace  it. 

In  aesthetic  education  the  same  principle  holds.  Some  ac- 
tual attainment  in  each  of  the  arts  is  no  doubt  a  real  aid  to  in- 
telligent appreciation.  And  no  art  lends  itself  more  easily  than 
music  to  such  attainment,  even  quite  outside  the  work  of  the 
regular  curriculum.  No  doubt  the  main  dependence  in  this 
•matter  of  aesthetic  education  must  be  upon  the  molding  influence 
of  the  best  in  these  realms,  so  far  as  the  college  can  furnish  this. 
"To  a  considerable  extent  this  is  possible  in  all  the  arts,  if  the  nec- 
essary means  are  granted.  But  if  these  influences  are  to  do  their 
full  work,  it  should  be  noted,  there  must  be  some  real  response 

[45] 


on  the  part  of  the  student,  made  possible  directly  through  courses 
intended  to  introduce  to  the  arts,  and  indirectly  through  the  less 
systematic  but  not  less  stimulating  suggestion  of  a  widespread 
interest  in  the  atmosphere  of  the  college. 

And  aesthetic  education  has  not  done  its  full  work  until  it 
has  brought  the  student  to  the  recognition  of  the  demands  of  the 
beautiful  in  all  his  work  and  in  all  his  surroundings,  and  to  the 
cherishing,  as  a  permanent  aim,  of  the  ideal  expression  of  the 
ideal  life. 

But  it  is  in  the  realms  of  the  social,  moral,  and  religious 
that  expressive  activity  is  most  imperatively  demanded.  If  men 
are  to  be  saved  from  mere  passive  sentimentalism  they  must  put 
their  desires,  aspirations,  and  ideals  into  act.  The  very  em- 
ployment of  the  student  in  bringing  him  continually  face  to  face 
with  noble  sentiments,  peculiarly  subjects  him  to  this  danger. 
That  which  is  not  expressed  dies.  A  man  can  be  best  prepared 
for  moral  earnestness,  social  efficiency,  and  a  genuine  religious 
response  in  life  only  through  active  expression  in  each  of  these 
spheres.  Men  are  best  trained  for  society  by  acting  in  society, 
for  the  responsibilities  of  a  democracy  by  taking  their  part  in  a 
really  democratic  community,  for  the  best  fulfillment  of  personal 
relations  by  honest  answer  to  the  varied  personal  demands — 
human  and  divine.  The  student  life  should  not  be  a  hermit  nor 
cloistered  nor  exclusive  life.  The  more  natural  and  normal  the 
personal  relations,  both  to  men  and  women,  in  the  midst  of 
which  the  student  lives,  the  better  the  preparation  for  the  ac- 
tual life  that  awaits  him.  And  let  his  relations  to  the  com- 
munity life,  civic  and  religious,  so  far  as  possible,  be  those  of 
an  ordinary  law-abiding  citizen,  and  let  him  act  as  such  a  citizen, 
so  far  as  such  action  is  open  to  him. 

Wherever  the  college  calls  for  the  attainment  of  definite 
ends,  wherever  it  sets  tasks  to  be  faithfully  done  at  given 
times,  wherever  it  calls  out  the  will  of  the  student  in  the  larger 
liberty  its  life  affords  him,  it  is  doing  something  for  the  develop- 
ment of  his  moral  and  religious  character.  But  its  responsibil- 
ity cannot  end  with  these  means.  The  atmosphere  of  a  college 
should  be  such  as  to  enlist  the  enthusiasm  of  the  students  in 


valuable  causes — and  there  are  a  great  variety  of  them — in 
which  they  may  already  have  some  share.  The  naturally  self- 
centered  life  of  the  student  peculiarly  needs  such  enlistment  in 
objective  causes.  In  the  midst  of  a  life  permeated  with  a  demo- 
cratic, unselfish,  and  reverent  spirit,  he  should  find  increasingly 
such  a  spirit  called  out  from  him.  Living  in  personal  rela- 
tions which  may  well  be  among  the  closest  and  richest  of  his  life, 
he  is  to  learn  the  capacity  for  friendship  in  the  only  way  it  can 
be  learned,  through  some  form  of  actual,  useful  service.  So  far 
as  college  traditions  are  in  conflict  with  such  an  ideal,  they  lag 
behind  any  really  Christian  civilization.  Certainly  the  college 
should  itself  afford  the  best  opportunities  for  the  students'  own 
initiative  and  expression  in  both  the  moral  and  religious  life. 
And  as — apart  from  personal  association — it  can  best  help  the 
moral  life  by  an  atmosphere  permeated  with  the  convictions  of 
the  social  consciousness,  so  it  can  best  help  the  religious  life  by 
making  dominant  a  conception  of  religion  that  shall  make  it  real 
and  rational  and  vital  for  the  mind  that  really  gives  it  attention. 
By  such  a  conception,  the  student's  own  response  is  most  natur- 
ally called  out. 

C.  Personal  Association. — But  it  is  called  out  even  so, 
not  so  much  by  the  teaching  as  by  the  spirit  of  the  men  back  of 
the  teaching.  And  we  are  thus  brought  to  the  greatest  of  all 
the  means  available  in  an  all-around  education — personal  as- 
sociation— already  necessarily  anticipated  in  part.  I  make  no 
doubt  that  the  prime  factors  in  a  complete  education  are  always 
persons,  not  things,  not  even  books.  It  would  not  be  difficult  to 
show  how  powerful  is  personal  association  in  all  the  lines  of  edu- 
cation, even  in  scientific  work;  but  it  is,  of  course,  most  indis- 
pensable in  moral  and  religious  training. 

The  inevitable  interactions  of  the  members  of  a  cosmo- 
politan student  body  are  themselves  of  the  greatest  intrinsic 
value.  The  great  fundamental  social  convictions — of  the  like- 
ness of  men,  of  the  mutual  influence  of  men,  of  the  sacredness  of 
the  person — are  developed  in  a  true  college  life  almost  perforce. 
And  the  more  genuinely  democratic  the  college,  the  more  cer- 
tain is  its  ability  to  make  socially  efficient  citizens.  For  the  sake 

[47] 


of  its  own  highest  mission,  it  can  afford  to  stand  against  the  aris- 
tocracy of  sex,  against  the  aristocracy  of  color,  against  the 
aristocracy  of  wealth,  against  the  aristocracy  of  the  clique, 
against  the  aristocracy  of  mere  intellectual  brilliancy.  And  it 
can  safely  carry  this  democratic  spirit  very  far  into  all  its  or- 
ganization and  working. 

Beyond  these  inevitable  social  interactions  of  the  college 
life,  it  is  a  great  thing  for  the  development  of  a  man  to  be  sur- 
prised into  really  unselfish  friendships.  And  the  college,  by 
its  great  community  of  interests  and  its  natural  atmosphere  of 
trust,  has  peculiar  power  in  bringing  about  just  such  unselfish 
friendships.  The  contribution  which  it  so  makes  not  only  to 
Character  but  also  to  happiness,  the  college  man  knows  well. 

But  either  in  morals  or  in  religion  we  know  but  one  royal 
road  to  the  highest  life — through  personal  association  with 
those  who  possess  such  a  life  as  we  ought  to  have,  to  whom  we 
can  look  in  admiration  and  love,  and  who  give  themselves  un- 
stintedly to  us.  There  is  no  cheaper  way.  Even  so  high  a 
service  is  often  rendered  to  one  student  by  another  student;  but 
it  is  a  wholly  just  demand  to  make  upon  a  college  that  that  serv- 
ice should  be  rendered  in  pre-eminent  degree  by  its  teachers. 
Whatever  may  be  true  in  other  parts  of  the  educational  system, 
the  college  teacher  must  be  one  from  whom  the  highest  living 
can  be  readily  caught.  In  the  interests  of  simple  honesty,  the 
college  teacher  must  be  thoroughly  prepared  to  teach  what  he 
professes  to  teach.  We  cannot  begin  in  character-making  with 
a  fraud.  And  for  the  same  reasons,  professing  to  teach  he 
should  be  able  to  teach.  He  must  have  sanity,  too,  and  tact — 
real  wisdom,  for  the  insights  of  only  such  a  man  will  be  sure  to 
count  with  others.  And,  as  a  man  who  must  stand  as  a  convinc- 
ing witness  for  the  best,  he  cannot  be  excused  from  the  requisites 
of  the  effective  witness — undoubted  character  and  conviction,, 
genuine  interest  in  the  deepest  life  of  others,  and  that  power  in 
putting  the  great  things  home,  that  should  belong  to  his  teaching 
ability.  His  highest  qualification  is  character-begetting  power — 
power  to  inspire  other  men  to  their  absolute  best.  When  one 
tries  to  measure  the  power  of  even  one  or  two  such  men  in  a 

[481 


college  community,  he  begins  to  see  at  last  what  the  one  indis- 
pensable factor  in  a  college  is,  and  how  much  is  at  stake  in  the 
choice  of  a  faculty.  Nothing,  let  us  be  sure,  so  certainly  brings 
about  the  deterioration  of  the  college,  as  carelessness  in  the  selec- 
tion of  its  teachers.  A  few  compromising  appointments  here 
may  easily  make  impossible  the  maintenance  of  the  college's 
highest  ideals  or  best  traditions.  The  spirit  of  a  college  cannot 
go  down  in  its  buildings  or  grounds  or  forms  of  organization. 
If  its  best  continues  at  all  and  grows,  it  must  continue  and  grow 
in  persons ;  and  the  petty  and  ignoble  cannot  carry  on  the  work 
of  the  great  and  worthy.  We  seem  to  be  in  the  midst  of  a  great 
awakening  to  the  over-weighting  importance  of  moral  and  reli- 
gious education,  and  the  movement  comes  none  too  soon ;  but  let 
us  not  for  a  moment  imagine  that  any  change  in  courses  or 
methods  or  organization  can  ever  take  the  place  of  the  one  great 
indispensable  means — the  personal  touch  of  great  and  high  per- 
sonalities. And  if  they  are  not  found  in  our  colleges,  where 
may  they  be  sought? 

III.       THE  REQUISITE  SPIRIT  IN  COLLEGE  EDUCATION. 

And  when  one  turns  to  characterize  the  spirit  of  the  true 
college  he  must  parallel,  as  we  have  seen,  the  great  means  of  a 
complex  life,  of  expressive  activity,  and  of  personal  association, 
with  the  demand  for  a  spirit — heartily  but  discriminatingly  cath- 
olic, thoroughly  objective,  and  marked  by  the  great  convictions 
of  the  social  consciousness.  In  the  discussion  of  the  means,  the 
spirit  needed  has  been  in  no  small  part  implied.  I  certainly  need 
not  say  more  concerning  the  catholicity  that  must  unmistakably 
mark  the  true  college. 

But  it  does  deserve  to  be  emphasized  that,  if  psychology's 
insistence  upon  the  importance  of  action  is  at  all  justified,  then 
our  normal  mood,  the  mood  of  the  best  work,  of  the  best  associa- 
tions, and  of  happiness  itself,  is  the  objective  mood.  The  great 
means  in  education,  of  using  one's  powers  in  an  interesting  and 
complex  environment,  even  for  the  very  sake  of  the  ideal,  itself 
demands  the  mood  of  work.  And  this  needs  to  be  particularly 
remembered  in  moral  and  religious  training.  The  student  life 

[49] 


in  any  case  is  quite  too  prone  to  be  self-centered,  and  therefore 
needs  all  the  more  the  objective  emphasis.  But  aside  from  this 
peculiar  need  of  the  student  life,  the  introspective  mood  itself 
has  a  smaller  contribution  to  make  to  the  moral  and  religious 
life  than  has  been  commonly  assumed.  Just  so  much  introspec- 
tion is  needed  as  to  make  sure  that  one  has  put  himself  in  the 
presence  of  the  great  objective  forces  that  lead  to  character  and 
to  God.  When  this  is  determined,  the  work  of  introspection  is 
practically  done.  The  dominant  mood  should  be  objective 
through  and  through. 

And  one  chief  and  good  cause  of  reaction,  no  doubt,  from 
some  of  the  older  methods  of  moral  and  religious  training  in 
college,  has  been  the  lack  of  this  objective  spirit.  This  does  not 
mean  any  underestimation  of  the  significance  of  personal  reli- 
gion, but  a  wholesome  sense  that  no  man  may  come  into  right 
personal  relations  with  God  without  sharing  the  life  of  God,  and 
that  life  is  love ;  and  love  cannot  be  cultivated  in  selfishness  and 
self-absorption. 

But  if  the  college  looks  pre-eminently  to  social  efficiency, 
and  if  its  greatest  means  is  personal  association,  its  spirit  must  be, 
above  all,  permeated  with  the  great  convictions  of  the  social 
consciousness.  Nowhere  should  the  atmosphere  be  more  genu- 
inely and  thoroughly  democratic,  charged  with  the  strong  sense 
of  the  likeness  of  men  in  the  great  essentials;  nowhere  a  more 
evident  setting  aside  of  all  artificial  and  merely  conventional 
standards  in  the  estimate  of  men.  No  small  part  of  the  value 
of  the  college  education  lies  in  bringing  a  man  steadily  to  the 
test  of  the  worth  of  his  naked  personality.  And  when  conven- 
tion rules,  the  very  life  of  the  college  has  gone  out. 

And  the  college  must  add  to  its  democratic  spirit  the  spirit 
of  responsibility  and  service.  Its  life  must  be  permeated  with 
the  conviction  that  men  are  inevitably  members  one  of  another, 
and  that  responsibility  for  others,  therefore,  is  inescapable;  that, 
moreover,  much  of  the  best  of  life  comes  through  this  knitting 
up  with  humanity  in  many-sided  personal  relations,  and,  in  con- 
sequence, this  mutual  influence  of  men  is  not  merely  inevitable, 
but  desirable  and  indispensable.  Surely,  a  true  cosmopolitan 

[50] 


college  must  be  able  to  send  out  men  marked  by  the  sense  of 
responsibility  and  of  the  obligation  of  service. 

But  no  high  development  is  possible  in  personal  friendship 
or  in  society  without  a  deep  sense  of  the  value  and  sacredness 
of  the  person.  What  even  the  golden  rule  really  demands  of  a 
man,  depends  upon  his  sense  of  the  significance  of  life,  of  the 
value  of  his  own  personality.  And  if  even  the  sense  of  the  like- 
ness and  of  the  mutual  influence  of  men  is  to  bear  satisfying 
fruit,  it  must  be  informed  throughout  by  reverent  regard  for  the 
liberty  and  the  person  of  others. 

And  nowhere  is  this  reverence  for  the  person  more  needed 
than  in  moral  and  religious  education.  For  the  very  aim  of 
such  education  is  to  bring  a  man  to  a  faith  and  a  life  of  his  own. 
This  requires  at  every  point  the  most  careful  guarding  of  the 
other's  liberty,  the  calling  out  everywhere  of  his  own  initiative. 
There  can  be,  therefore,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  no  mere  im- 
position upon  another  of  any  genuine  moral  and  religious  life. 
And  more  than  this  is  true.  What  you  will  do,  what  you  can 
do,  for  another  will  be  measured  by  your  sense  of  his  value. 
If  men  are  for  you  mere  creatures  of  a  day  with  but  meager 
possibilities,  nothing  can  call  out  from  you  the  largest  service  in 
their  behalf.  Nor  is  this  all.  With  the  sense  of  the  value,  the 
preciousness,  of  the  person,  comes  a  genuine  reverence,  that  not 
only  sacredly  guards  the  other's  moral  initiative,  but  under- 
stands that  the  inner  life  of  another  is  rightly  inviolate;  that  in 
any  high  friendship,  nay,  in  any  true  personal  relation,  there  can 
be  only  request,  never  demand.  The  highest  man  stands  with 
Christ  at  the  door  of  the  heart  of  the  other,  only  knocking  that 
he  may  come  in,  by  the  other's  full  consent  alone. 

And,  if  the  college  is  to  grapple  in  any  effective  way  with 
moral  and  religious  education,  it  must,  beyond  all  else,  have  a 
spirit  instinct  with  such  reverence  for  the  person.  On  this  very) 
account,  indirect  methods  here  may  be  really  more  effective  than! 
direct  methods.  Some  wise  instruction  undoubtedly  is  desirable, 
and  even  imperative,  but  it  must  be  given  by  men  who  have  a 
delicate  sense  of  what  personality  means ;  and  the  spirit  that  per- 
vades the  college  is  here  more  effective  even  than  the  instruc- 

[51  1 


h 
" 


tion ;  and  it  would  not  be  difficult  to  overdo  definite  instruction 
in  this  field.  Character  and  religion  are  always  rather  caught 
than  taught. 

I  cannot  doubt,  then,  that  a  second  important  reason  for 
reaction  from  the  older  college  in  its  moral  and  religious  educa- 
tion has  been  because  it  too  often  forgot  the  supreme  need  of 
reverence  for  the  person  of  the  pupil.  The  disrepute  into  which 
the  so-called  "paternal"  methods  have  fallen  implies  as  much. 
But  is  it  not  worth  our  while  to  remember  that  the  name — 
paternal — is  falsely  given  in  such  a  case?  The  highest  char- 
acteristic of  the  true  father  is  a  deep  sense  of  the  value  and 
sacredness  of  the  person  of  his  child,  not  the  desire  to  dominate. 
And  no  moral  and  religious  education  worthy  of  the  name  is 
possible  in  a  college  where  such  reverence  for  the  person  does  not 
prevail ;  for  that  reverence,  deep-seated  and  all-pervading,  is  the 
finest  test  of  culture,  the  highest  attainment  in  character,  and 
the  surest  warrant  for  social  efficiency. 

And  these  great  ends — culture,  character,  and  social  effi- 
ciency— the  true  college  must  set  before  itself.  The  great 
means  to  these  ends  are  unmistakable:  an  environment  suffi- 
ciently complex  to  give  acquaintance  with  the  great  fundamental 
facts  of  the  world  and  to  call  out  the  entire  man ;  the  completest 
possible  expressive  activity  on  the  part  of  the  student;  and  per- 
sonal association  with  broad  and  wise  and  noble  lives.  The 
spirit  demanded  is  equally  indisputable — broadly  but  discrimi- 
natingly catholic  in  its  interests ;  objective  in  mood  and  method ; 
democratic,  unselfish,  and  finely  reverent  in  its  personal  relations. 

In  all — means  and  spirit — the  primacy  of  the  person  is  to 
be  steadfastly  maintained.  All  that  is  most  valuable  in  college 
education  exists  only  in  living  men.  "God  give  us  men." 


[52] 


IS  MODERN  EDUCATION  CAPABLE  OF  IDEALISM? 

ADDRESSES      BY      WILLIAM      JEWETT      TUCKER,       D.D.,      LL.D.,     PRESIDENT 
OF      DARTMOUTH     COLLEGE. 

I  assume  that  I  have  your  assent  to  these  two  propositions: 
first,  it  is  the  business  of  education  to  accept,  when  it  may  not 
create,  the  material  of  knowledge ;  second,  it  is  the  business  of  the 
higher  education  to  idealize  whatever  material  of  knowledge  it 
accepts. 

No  greater  calamity,  it  seems  to  me,  can  befall  an  age,  apart 
from  a  moral  lapse,  than  to  have  its  intellectual  training  de- 
tached from  the  mind  of  the  age.  Wherever  men  are  thinking 
most  vigorously,  there  those  who  are  to  follow  after  must  be 
trained  to  think,  otherwise  there  will  be  in  due  time  intellectual 
revolt  with  its  consequent  delays  and  wastes. 

But  more  knowledge,  whether  it  be  old  or  new,  is  not  the 
«nd  of  education,  but  rather  knowledge  penetrated  by  insight 
and  alive  with  motive.  A  fact  is  something  which  has  been 
done,  something  which  has  found  a  place  in  the  world  of  reality. 
There  may  be  that  in  the  creation  of  a  fact  which  declares  its 
whole  power.  There  are  deeds  from  which  nothing  can  be 
taken  and  to  which  nothing  can  be  added.  But  most  facts,  es- 
pecially those  which  have  not  been  accomplished  by  the  hand  of 
man,  awrait  questioning.  When  an  answer  comes  back  we 
speak  of  discovery.  When  the  full  answer  comes  back  we  an- 
nounce a  theory,  a  principle,  a  law.  The  understanding  of 
facts,  whether  personal  or  impersonal,  of  man's  doing,  that  is, 
or  of  nature's  doing,  the  relating  of  facts  to  one  another,  the 
discovery  of  the  moral  incentive  in  facts,  make  up  in  part  the 
idealizing  process  which  belongs  to  the  higher  education. 

Modern  education  differs  from  the  education  which  has 
come  to  us  by  long  inheritance  through  the  vast  amount  of 
subject-matter  which  it  has  put  into  our  hands,  awaiting  the 

[63] 


idealizing  process.  The  new  subject-matter  is  in  large  degree 
the  raw  material  of  knowledge,  not  having  passed  through  the 
alchemy  of  time,  devoid  of  sentiment,  lacking  in  those  associa- 
tions which  make  up  the  moral  increment  of  knowledge.  It 
represents  literatures  which  have  not  reached  the  final  form, 
sciences  which  run  straight  to  application  rather  than  to  philo- 
sophical conclusion,  and  theories  of  society  and  government 
which  are  too  serious  and  urgent  to  be  held  in  academic  dis- 
cussion. 

But  the  new  subject  matter  of  knowledge  is  powerful, 
nevertheless,  subtle  enough  to  create  an  atmosphere,  and  tangible 
enough  to  create  an  environment.  Mr.  A.  J.  Balfour  has  used 
a  term  which  expresses  with  rare  exactness  one  of  the  relations 
of  the  new  knowledge  to  our  thinking.  It  has  created,  he  says, 
a  new,  "mental  framework."  I  quote  the  brief  passage  which 
holds  this  definition.  In  an  address  upon  the  Nineteenth  Cen- 
tury, he  remarked  that  it  is  not  the  distinction  of  the  century 
"that  it  has  witnessed  a  prodigious  and  unexampled  growth  in 
our  stock  of  knowledge.  Something  much  more  important  than 
this  has  happened.  Our  whole  point  of  view  has  altered.  The 
mental  framework  in  which  we  arrange  the  separate  facts  in  the 
world  of  men  and  of  things  is  quite  a  new  framework.  The 
spectacle  of  the  new  universe  presents  itself  now  in  a  wholly 
changed  prospective:  we  not  only  see  more  but  we  see 
differently." 

The  term,  a  "new  mental  framework,"  suggests  at  once  the 
idea  of  adjustment,  and  if  you  will  review  the  educational  work 
of  the  decades  just  passed,  you  will  see  how  definitely,  how 
completely  I  may  say,  adjustment  has  been  our  business.  The 
process  has  been  carried  on  partly  in  strife  and  contention,  partly 
by  inquiry,  and  partly  through  that  understanding  which  comes 
only  from  the  actual  handling  of  unfamiliar  knowledge.  For  so 
large  an  undertaking  the  process  has  been  rapid.  Let  me  re- 
mind you  that  it  was  on  the  first  of  October,  1859,  tnat  Mr. 
Darwin  sent  out  his  abstract,  as  he  termed  it,  on  the  Origin  of 
Species,  accompanying  the  volume  with  the  modest  prophecy  that 
"when  the  views  entertained  in  this  volume,  or  when  analogous 

[  54] 


views  are  generally  admitted,  we  can  dimly  foresee  that  there 
will  be  a  considerable  revolution  in  natural  history." 

The  process  of  adjustment  is  nearly  over,  so  nearly  over 
that  we  may  now,  I  think,  address  ourselves  to  a  severer  but 
nobler  task — that  of  idealizing  our  new  knowledge  and  the 
methods  of  its  acquisition.  And  the  essential  condition,  let  me 
say,  of  undertaking  the  task  is  that  we  approach  it  in  the  right 
state  of  mind.  The  traditional  mind  is  not  altogether  in  the 
right  state.  It  is  too  ready  to  draw  offhand  distinctions  between 
culture  and  utility,  too  ready  to  ignore  the  ethical  possibility  of 
the  new  education.  What  we  need  just  now  in  the  educational 
world  more  than  anything  else  is  an  ethical  revival  at  the  heart 
of  education.  We  shall  not  have  it  until  we  realize  more 
clearly  the  need  of  it. 

If  we  should  make  a  careful  assessment  of  the  present 
moral  values  in  the  subject-matter  of  education,  we  should  be 
surprised,  I  think,  to  see  how  large  has  been  the  diversion  or 
decline  of  these  values.  I  refer,  of  course,  to  subjects  and  to 
the  mode  of  their  treatment.  The  old  discipline  which  held  the 
Hebrew  literature  with  its  elemental  righteousness,  so  much 
of  science  as  could  be  classified  under  natural  theology  and  a 
philosophy  which  vexed  itself  with  the  problems  of  human  des- 
tiny, was  a  discipline  prosecuted  under  the  very  sanction  of  re- 
ligion. But  when  the  transfer  was  made  in  literature  to  the 
classics  and  when  the  sciences  began  to  be  applied  and  when  the 
end  of  philosophy  changed  in  part  with  the  change  of  data,  the 
subject-matter  of  the  higher  education  ceased  to  be  religiously 
ethical.  We  have  been  singularly  unconscious  of  the  change. 
Under  changes  in  form  we  have  kept  the  same  sentiment.  Cul- 
ture has  become  with  us  a  kind  of  morality.  So  long  as  the  old 
discipline  kept  its  associations  and  its  methods  and  gave  us  con- 
sistent results,  we  asked  few  questions  about  the  moral  content 
of  teaching,  and  therefore  made  no  comparison  of  values.  In 
fact,  we  have  silently  abandoned  the  idea  that  the  chief  ethical 
value  of  college  instruction  lies  in  the  curriculum.  The  reserva- 
tions which  we  make  in  behalf  of  certain  distinctly  ethical  or 
semi-religious  subjects  are  too  few  to  bear  the  weight  of  moral 

[55] 


•obligation  which  the  higher  education  ought  to  assume. 

Where  then  shall  we  look  for  the  recovery  and  advance- 
ment of  education  to  its  highest  ethical  power?  Chiefly,  I 
believe,  to  our  capacity  for  carrying  on  the  idealizing  process 
through  which  we  accustom  ourselves  to  think  reverently  of  all 
knowledge,  to  insist  upon  all  intellectual  work  as  a  moral  dis- 
cipline and  to  hold  all  intellectual  attainments  and  achievements 
as  tributary  to  the  social  good. 

I  believe  that  the  finest,  partly  because  it  is  the  really  dis- 
tinctive product  of  academic  life,  is  the  knowing  mind.  The 
moral  danger  from  it  is  inappreciable.  Pride,  conceit,  arrogance, 
if  they  ever  attend  knowledge,  are  intruders  and  transients. 
They  are  not  companions  or  guests.  Knowledge  leads  to  awe, 
and  awe  to  faith,  or  to  that  kind  of  doubt  which  is  as  humble  as 
faith.  It  is  the  unknowing  mind  with  its  triviality,  its  uncer- 
tainties, its  double  vision,  from  which  we  have  most  to  fear. 
And  if  we  get  the  knowing  in  place  of  the  unknowing  mind,  it  is 
not  of  so  much  account  how  we  get  it,  as  that  we  get  it.  For 
this  reason  I  deprecate  any  academic  discrimination  against  use- 
ful knowledge.  If  utility  can  create  the  knowing  mind,  we 
wrant  its  aid.  I  would  accept  at  any  time  the  moral  result  of 
serious  thinking  on  the  inferior  subject  in  place  of  less  serious 
thinking  upon  the  greater  subject. 

The  mental  gymnastics  of  the  old  dialectic  had  no  ethical 
value.  The  subject-matter  of  discourse  might  be  God  himself, 
but  that  did  not  necessarily  make  the  discourse  religious  or  moral. 
It  was  the  play  of  the  mind,  not  its  serious  business.  No  one, 
I  am  sure,  can  overlook  the  immense  moral  gain  which  has  taken 
place  through  the  transfer  of  thought  in  so  large  degree  from 
speculation  to  sober  inquiry.  Very  much  of  the  change  is  due  of 
course  to  the  incoming  of  such  a  vast  amount  of  new  subject- 
matter  within  reach  of  the  human  mind.  It  was  natural  that 
men  should  now  begin  to  search  where  before  they  had  tried  to 
conjecture,  and  that  they  should  attempt  to  prove  or  disprove 
what  before  they  had  affirmed.  The  change  of  method  soon 
became,  as  I  have  said,  morally  significant.  After  the  first 
excitements  and  confusion  attendant  upon  the  change  the  ideal- 

[56] 


izing  process  set  in.  A  type  of  mind  was  developed  which  in- 
stinctively put  first  the  love  of  truth.  I  do  not  fear  that  in 
the  long  run  the  love  of  gain  will  prove  to  be  the  successful 
competitor.  The  noble  fellowship  of  seekers  after  truth  is  being 
.augumented,  not  decreased  in  these  latter  days.  And  through- 
out this  fellowship,  though  its  work  may  take  the  whole  range  of 
nature,  the  increasing  tendency  is  toward  faith.  "I  have  never 
been  able,"  President  Eliot  has  said  in  these  reverent  words,  "to 
find  any  better  answer  to  the  question,  what  is  the  chief  end  of 
study  in  nature?  than  the  answer  which  the  Westminster  Cat- 
echism gives  to  the  question,  what  is  the  chief  end  of  man? 
namely  to  glorify  God  and  to  enjoy  Him  forever." 

Next  to  the  reverence  for  knowledge  which  is  akin  to  the 
love  of  truth,  I  should  insist  in  our  idealizing  process  upon  the 
morality  of  that  more  active  discipline  which  characterizes  mod- 
ern education.  The  old  education,  as  we  well  know,  was  based 
morally  on  the  will  trained  to  obedience.  It  was  not  a  passive 
training.  It  is  never  passive  to  obey.  But  it  was  not  an  ac- 
tive discipline  in  the  sense  in  which  modern  training  is  carried 
on.  And  in  so  far  as  the  material  of  training  lay  in  the  past 
the  mind  was  set  upon  interpretation  more  than  upon  creative  or 
productive  work.  The  receptive  faculties  were  by  no  means 
•exclusively  developed,  for  there  was  always  a  fine  appeal  to  the 
imagination  and  to  the  sensibilities,  but  the  prescription  of  sub- 
jects put  education  largely  into  the  hands  of  the  master. 

Modern  education  lays  the  stress  upon  the  discovery  of  the 
individual  to  himself,  preferably  by  himself.  It  does  not  remove 
the  period  of  intellectual  compulsion,  but  it  reduces  that  period 
to  the  limits  of  early  training.  It  addresses  itself  necessarily  to 
the  will,  but  it  changes  the  appeal  as  soon  as  practicable  from 
obedience  to  choice.  Its  first  effort  is  to  awaken,  its  second  and 
constant  effort  to  create  the  sense  of  responsibility.  Education 
is  made  co-operative.  It  is  made  as  quickly  as  possible  the  con- 
senting, choosing  action  of  the  mind.  Modern  education  rests 
upon  the  individuality  of  the  individual,  not  upon  his  necessary 
likeness  to  others.  It  assumes  that  the  mind  of  each  individual 
if  properly  awakened  and  left  free  to  act  will  separate  itself  from 

[57] 


other  minds  in  the  satisfaction  of  its  own  desires,  and  the  devel- 
opment of  its  own  powers.  The  logical  outcome  of  this  con- 
ception is  not  the  compulsory  course  of  study,  continued  beyond 
the  necessary  elements  of  knowledge,  in  the  farther  interest  of 
discipline  or  of  culture,  but  the  elective  course  of  study  in  the  in- 
terest of  self-development  and  personal  attainment  in  knowledge. 
It  takes  the  risks  of  intellectual  freedom  for  the  sake  of  the 
greater  possibilities  of  intellectual  freedom. 

Now  the  ethical  quality  which  resides  in  freedom  is  responsi- 
bility, and  the  intellectual  expression  of  responsibility  is  choice. 
Will  the  one  thus  choosing  become  morally  a  strong  man  ?  Not 
necessarily.  It  is  not  safe  to  argue  from  intellectual  obedience — 
even  to  a  creed — that  the  further  result  will  be  complete  moral 
character.  You  may  have  the  immoral  scholar,  as  you  may  have 
the  immoral  believer.  But  the  morality  of  the  intellect  is  not  the 
least  among  the  guarantees  of  general  morality.  And  the  in- 
tellect trained  by  responsibility  ought  to  be  as  strong  morally  as 
the  intellect  trained  by  obedience.  There  is,  I  think,  a  certain 
elevation  which  comes  to  one  who  has  found  and  proven  himself, 
which  can  hardly  be  reached  in  any  other  way,  a  kind  of  scorn 
for  that  incapacity  for  nobler  things  which  leads  one  to  do  the 
meaner  thing.  I  have  seen  college  men  on  their  way  to  littleness 
and  shame  so  often  recovered  and  saved  by  the  intellectual 
awakening  through  some  subject  of  personal  choice,  a  subject 
without  any  moral  significance  in  itself,  that  I  cannot  doubt  the 
ethical  value  of  the  method.  I  am  not  concerned  with  the  moral 
supremacy  of  either  method.  It  is  quite  too  early  to  determine 
this  point.  What  we  need  to  do  is  to  recognize  the  moral  ele- 
ment in  the  method,  which  for  other  ends,  we  have  adopted. 
We  can  make  modern  training  a  morality  if  we  will.  The  ele- 
ments of  moral  power  are  present  and  active.  The  full  recogni- 
tion of  them  is  a  great  means  to  their  development. 

Beyond  the  reverence  for  knowledge  which  is  akin  to  the 
love  of  truth,  and  the  recognition  of  the  moral  power  which  is 
latent  in  an  active  intellectual  discipline,  I  would  see  our  modern 
education  permeated  with  the  sense  of  the  social  obligation.  The 
essential  nobility  of  the  old  education  lay  in  the  open  fact  that  it 

[  58] 


was  for  somebody.  There  was  no  concealment  of  this  purpose. 
It  was  graven  on  all  the  foundations  of  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries  and  on  many  of  those  laid  in  the  nineteenth 
century.  It  was  blazoned  on  their  seals.  It  was  illustrated  in 
the  life  of  devotion  which  characterized  so  large  a  proportion  of 
the  earlier  graduates.  They  sought  the  most  direct  avenues  of 
approach  to  the  heart  of  humanity. 

There  can  be  no  other  kind  of  nobility  worthy  of  the  pur- 
pose of  any  great  school  of  learning.  A  training  which  lacks 
these  motives,  or  which  fails  to  keep  this  aim  in  full  view  cannot 
be  touched  with  ideality.  But  modern  education  meets  this  dif- 
ficulty, that  it  must  fit  men  for  an  immensely  widening  applica- 
tion of  the  principle.  Under  the  old  education  the  great  services 
were  delegated.  Elect  souls  were  set  apart  for  high  and  ex- 
ceptional duties.  It  was  the  age  of  the  prophet,  the  missionary, 
the  reformer,  and  the  occasional  man  of  public  career.  Today 
it  is  not  possible  for  one  educated  man  to  find  a  place  where  he 
can  be  free  from  the  social  obligation.  It  has  become  the  task 
of  modern  education  to  train  the  average  man  for  duties  which 
are  sufficiently  imperative  and  exacting  for  the  exceptional  man. 
The  opportunity  of  the  more  devoted  callings  of  other  times  is 
matched  in  every  department  of  life.  The  decision  of  a  great 
judge,  the  example  of  a  great  employer,  the  insight  of  a  great 
teacher,  the  self-sacrifice  of  a  great  investigator,  all  rank  among 
the  powers  which  make  for  righteousness.  The  "hard  sayings" 
of  our  generation  which  those  only  who  can  hear  them  are  able 
to  receive,  are  concerned  with  integrity,  justice,  courage,  charity, 
and  sacrifice.  Sacrifice,  I  say,  and  to  the  degree  of  Christian 
consecration. 

The  highest  place  in  our  land,  if  to  position  be  added  per- 
manency, is  a  seat  on  the  bench  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States.  When  a  man  puts  by  the  offer  of  this  position 
that  he  may  serve  an  alien  and  dependent  people  in  the  interest 
of  the  common  humanity,  I  rank  this  surrender  to  duty  among 
the  consecrated  examples  of  the  foreign  missionary  service.  And 
if  our  foreign  policy  as  a  nation  shall  develop  a  like  spirit  among 
those  who  aspire  to,  or  who  accept  political  office,  we  shall  bring 


back  again  that  old  fundamental  unity  which  made  of  one 
spiritual  kin  the  servants  of  the  church  and  of  the  state. 

It  was  in  view  of  these  demands  that  I  said  a  little  while 
ago  that  the  greatest  present  need  in  the  educational  world  was 
that  of  an  ethical  revival  at  the  heart  of  education.  The  idealiz- 
ing process  cannot  stop  with  culture ;  it  must  somehow  culminate 
in  righteousness.  And  if  it  be  asked  again,  Is  modern  education 
capable  of  such  idealism?  I  say  yes,  provided  the  question  be 
accepted  not  as  a  question,  but  as  a  challenge.  Modern  educa- 
tion is  here,  with  its  materials  of  knowledge,  with  its  active  dis- 
cipline, with  its  environment  of  duty.  It  is  quite  aside  to  com- 
pare the  idealism  of  the  old  and  the  new.  If  I  were  asked  what 
is  the  equivalent  of  Greek,  I  should  reply  with  Professor  Nor- 
ton, "there  is  no  equivalent."  But  that  is  not  the  issue.  The 
clear  and  sharp  issue  is,  can  we  idealize  modern  education  ?  Can 
we  put  ethics  at  the  heart  of  it?  I  would  not  evade  the  issue,, 
nor  lessen  its  meaning. 

In  the  old  cemetery,  where  the  founder  of  my  college  lies 
there  runs  this  epitaph  on  his  tomb,  "By  the  Gospel  he  sub- 
dued the  ferocity  of  the  savage.  And  to  the  civilized  he  opened 
new  paths  of  science.  Traveler:  Go,  if  you  can,  and  deserve 
the  sublime  reward  of  such  merit." 

I  like  to  go  there  from  time  to  time  and  read  this  challenge 
out  of  the  heart  of  the  eighteenth  century.  It  seems  to  say  to 
me,  "Man  of  the  twentieth  century,  go,  if  you  can,  do  an  equal 
task,  declare  an  equal  purpose,  show  an  equal  spirit." 

The  past  has  earned  the  right  to  challenge  the  men  of  to- 
day. But  stronger  than  any  words  of  the  past  are  the  words  of 
the  present  need.  I  have  tried  to  give  them  utterance  and  in- 
terpretation. It  remains  for  me  only  to  express  my  faith  in  the 
idealizing  process  which  is  going  on  in  the  educational  world, 
and  declare  my  confidence  in  the  motives  and  purposes  and 
methods  of  those  who  are  guiding  its  thoughts  and  activities, 
and  more  especially  to  welcome  to  this  supreme  position  of  in- 
fluence the  man  of  your  choice,  qualified  for  all  its  duties,  and 
standing  preeminent  among  his  brethren  in  his  new  fellowship, 
in  his  new  capacity  to  understand  and  to  satisfy  the  ethical  de- 
mands of  modern  education. 

[60] 


ADDRESS  BY  HON.  J.  G.  W.   COWLES,  LL.D., 

ON   BEHALF  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  TRUSTEES. 

The  election  and  inauguration  of  Professor  Henry  Church- 
ill King  as  the  sixth  president  of  Oberlin  College,  in  its  sev- 
entieth year,  mark  the  progress  and  growth  of  the  college  along, 
the  lines  of  its  origin  and  history,  without  radical  change,  ex- 
cept in  the  lives  of  men,  who  must  pass  away  yielding  their 
places  and  their  labors  to  their  successors. 

We  have  now  a  larger  and  better  Oberlin  than  was  con- 
ceived by  the  founders  and  established  here  in  the  wilderness 
seventy  years  ago.  That  was  great  only  in  embryo  and  in 
ideals :  for  Shipherd  and  Stewart,  if  not  prudent  were  prophetic. 
What  they  lacked  in  worldly  wisdom  they  made  up  in  enthusi- 
asm and  single-mindedness.  What  they  wanted  in  money  they 
made  up  in  energy  and  self-denial.  If  their  faith,  being  un- 
warranted by  reasons,  appeared  presumption,  the  tide  of  provi- 
dential events  carried  their  enterprise  over  shoals  and  rocks 
threatening  its  destruction  into  deeper  and  wider  seas  of  oppor- 
tunity than  their  most  sanguine  hopes  imagined.  A  divine- 
guidance  made  their  aim,  though  sometimes  erring,  hit  a  mark 
beyond  what  they  foresaw.  They  appeared  eccentric  because 
they  did  not  conform  to  established  customs,  nor  hold  experi- 
mental theories  as  abstractions,  but  projected  them  at  once 
into  inconvenient  and  uncomfortable  action.  Conscience  dom- 
inated more  than  judgment,  but  as  always  happens  when  men 
do  right  as  God  gives  them  to  see  the  right,  the  heavens  did 
not  fall,  though  the  earth  (or  some  part  of  it)  rose  in  insur- 
rection. 

The  first  president  and  faculty  of  Oberlin  College  were 
strong  men,  not  only  in  relation  to  the  institution,  but  by  what- 
ever standard  of  measurement  and  comparison  their  force  and 
value  may  be  estimated. 

The  first  president,  Asa  Marian,  and  the  second,  Charles. 

[61] 


G.  Finney,  came  here  together  and  were  associated  from  the 
beginning,  their  two  terms  as  president  covering  thirty  years. 
Both  exercised  a  powerful  influence  upon  the  college  and  upon 
the  public  in  relation  to  it,  but  the  influence  of  President  Fin- 
ney at  all  times  predominated,  and  continued  constant  and  un- 
diminished  for  more  than  forty  years. 

He  was  not  a  college  bred  man  nor  an  ideal  college  presi- 
dent, either  as  executive  or  from  the  standpoint  of  classical  or 
scientific  education.  He  was  a  preacher  and  evangelist,  and  a 
teacher  of  theology,  not  only  in  the  class  but  through  the  pulpit 
and  the  press.  He  was  a  man  of  God,  and  Oberlin  may  rightly 
be  called  the  college  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Spiritual  rather  than 
material  forces,  spiritual  even  more  than  intellectual  concep- 
tions and  causes,  operated  in  the  creation  of  the  college.  It  was 
not  alone  a  Christian,  it  was  a  spiritual  movement.  Learning 
was  valued,  sought  for,  imparted,  offered  to  all  of  either  sex 
and  any  color,  less  for  its  own  sake  than  for  its  influence  on 
character.  It  was  not  only  for  education  but  for  salvation,  for 
the  Kingdom  of  God,  that  the  college  stood  and  labored. 

The  third  president,  James  H.  Fairchild,  was  a  product 
of  Oberlin,  conceived  in  this  spirit :  a  pupil  of  Mahan  and  Fin- 
ney, and  associated  with  the  latter  through  his  presidency,  not 
only  as  a  professor,  but  practically  as  Dean  of  the  Faculty,  be- 
ginning then  in  fact  the  administration  which  he  afterward  car- 
ried on  as  president  for  a  further  period  of  twenty-three  years. 

Finney  and  Fairchild  were  the  constructive  presidents  of 
the  college  who  more  largely  than  any  or  all  other  influences 
have  made  it  what  it  has  been  and  is  to  be. 

The  agreements  and  differences  of  these  men  have  added 
greatly  to  the  total  results  of  their  joint  and  successive  labors 
for  the  college.  The  legacies  of  thought  and  influence,  of  per- 
sonality and  power,  left  by  them  are  our  greatest  riches,  which 
their  immediate  successors,  the  fourth  president,  William  G. 
Ballantine,  and  the  fifth  president,  John  Henry  Barrows,  in 
their  briefer  terms  of  office,  could  only  use,  preserve  and  apply 
to  present  needs  without  much  altering  or  much  increasing. 
The  work  of  President  Barrows  was  more  largely  financial 

[62] 


than  scholastic  or  even  administrative,  nearly  doubling  the  pro- 
ductive endowment,  while  Professor  King  conducted  the  in- 
ternal administration  of  the  college. 

Thus  Professor  King  was  the  natural  and  logical  suc- 
cessor of  President  Barrows;  also  of  President  Fairchild;  for 
the  transition  from  Fairchild  to  King,  though  interrupted  and 
postponed,  was  most  intimate  and  vital,  intellectually  and 
spiritually,  as  that  from  teacher  to  pupil,  especially  in  phi- 
losophy and  theology,  as  well  as  in  the  constructive  and  admin- 
istrative work  of  the  college. 

Thus  there  has  been  preserved  from  the  beginning  a  singu- 
lar unity  in  aim,  purpose,  spirit  and  method  in  the  conduct  of 
the  college,  without  interruption  or  diversion  from  the  original 
plan  and  object  of  its  foundation,  viz.:  (as  stated  in  the  first 
annual  report  in  1834)  "the  diffusion  of  useful  science,  sound 
morality  and  pure  religion  among  the  growing  multitudes  of 
the  Mississippi  Valley"  and  "to  bear  an  important  part  in  ex- 
tending these  blessings  to  the  destitute  millions  which  over- 
spread the  earth" ;  by  means  of  first,  "the  thorough  education  of 
ministers  and  pious  school  teachers;  second,  the  elevation  of 
female  character,  and  third,  the  education  of  the  common 
people  with  the  higher  classes  in  such  a  manner  as  suits  the 
nature  of  Republican  institutions."  It  is  indeed  remarkable 
how  largely  these  aims  have  been  realized. 

The  peculiarities  of  the  college  which  long  made  it  of- 
fensive to  public  opinion  have  disappeared  in  the  common  ac- 
ceptance of  its  principles.  Its  anti-slavery  position  was  vin- 
dicated by  the  act  of  emancipation  after  thirty  years.  Its  anti- 
caste  position  in  the  admission  of  colored  students  became  com- 
mon in  the  American  colleges  in  the  change  of  sentiment  fol- 
lowing the  civil  war.  The  emphasis  it  gave  to  the  education 
of  young  women,  giving  them  equal  rights  and  opportunities  in 
the  college  classes  in  the  innovating  system  of  co-education,  has 
been  followed  not  only  by  the  adoption  of  co-education  in  many 
colleges  and  universities  at  home  and  abroad,  but  also  by  the 
building  of  many  separate  and  also  associate  colleges  for  wo- 
men only,  of  which  when  Oberlin  was  founded  there  were 

[63] 


none.  Co-education  here  was  an  incident  to  the  larger  purpose 
of  furnishing  a  classical  and  liberal  education  to  the  "under- 
valued and  neglected  sex."  And  the  theology  of  Finney  then 
so  far  advanced  beyond  orthodox  Calvinism  as  to  be  charged 
with  heresy  now  stands  in  the  front  of  evangelical  conservatism 
against  the  extreme  liberal  tendencies  of  religious  thought. 

So  we  stand  now  on  the  common  level,  with  no  factitious 
advantages  or  disadvantages,  in  building  up  and  carrying  for- 
ward the  work  of  the  college.  We  are  in  closer  association 
both  of  fellowship  and  also  of  competition,  with  other  colleges 
than  formerly.  Our  chief  distinction  hereafter,  if  any,  must  be 
in  excellence  in  common  methods.  Our  place  is  still  is  and  will 
be  in  the  class  of  Christian  colleges.  These  are  largely  in  the 
majority  of  our  educational  institutions.  Out  of  460  classed 
as  higher  institutions  of  learning  360  were  founded  or  conducted 
by  some  branch  of  the  Christian  Church,  with  two-thirds  of 
the  students  in  colleges  enrolled  in  them.  Christian  ideals,  the 
Christian  spirit  and  motive,  and  the  practice  of  religion,  no  less 
than  instruction  in  religious  truth,  do  and  must  continue  here 
coordinate  with  the  teaching  of  the  learned  languages  and  liberal 
arts  and  sciences.  The  evangelical  and  the  missionary  spirit  do, 
and  no  doubt  will  continue  to  prevail  in  a  large  degree,  though 
it  may  appear  to  be  in  less  proportion  to  the  whole  value  and 
effect  of  the  education  furnished. 

The  college  stands  now  upon  a  better  financial  founda- 
tion than  ever  before.  Its  needs  are  still  great,  but  not  dis- 
tressing. The  president  may  safely  give  his  first  and  best 
thought  and  effort  to  the  work  of  education  in  its  broadest 
sense,  rather  than  to  the  business  of  advertising  and  of  solicit- 
ing increased  endowments.  The  latter  should  come  and  will 
come,  not  without  effort,  but  more  as  the  reward  of  merit  than 
as  the  result  of  special  pleading.  It  is  significant  and  encourag- 
ing that  a  few  weeks  after  the  election  of  President  King,  a 
friend  of  the  college  who  had  recently  given  $50,000,  wrote  to 
a  trustee  offering  to  give  another  $50,000  (later  increased  to 
$100,000)  toward  a  second  half  million  dollars  to  be  raised, 
saying  in  his  letter  "with  the  emphasis  placed  on  the  teaching 

[64] 


side  in  the  selection  of  the  new  president,  the  college  has  fol- 
lowed, I  think,  the  true  order, — dignifying  at  the  same  time 
the  office  of  trustee,  in  placing  more  fully  upon  the  Board  the 
responsibility  of  provision  of  facilities  by  which  the  president 
and  faculty  can  do  the  best  work";  and  he  adds  that  "having 
been  founded  in  the  interest  of  the  'things  of  the  Spirit/  Ober- 
lin  is  still  informed  by  the  same  spirit,  in  its  present  aim  and 
work  and  so  worthy  to  command  cordially  and  effectively  the 
interest  of  good  people." 

Oberlin  has  always  been  poor  and  may  long  remain  so 
relatively  to  other  colleges,  to  the  numbers  of  its  faculty  and 
students,  and  to  the  work  accomplished:  (I  think  no  other  col- 
lege has  done  so  much  with  so  little).  Its  presidents  and  pro- 
fessors have  been  and  still  are  underpaid,  receiving,  as  has  been 
said  reproachfully,  "missionary  salaries."  But  is  not  this  a  term 
of  praise  and  honor  rather  than  of  reproach,  signifying  that  they 
give  themselves  to  the  cause  for  the  good  to  be  done?  The 
highest  salary  received  by  President  Fairchild  in  his  twenty- 
three  years'  presidency  and  sixty  years'  teaching  service  for  the 
college,  was  $2,000  a  year;  most  of  the  time  much  less.  With 
such  examples  of  unselfishness,  showing  the  greatness  of  unre- 
warded service,  we  shall  more  surely  avoid  becoming  avaricious 
and  worldly-minded  in  the  false  opinion  that  money  makes  or 
can  make  the  college;  except  in  so  far  as  it  commands,  employs 
and  liberates  men  for  the  intellectual  and  spiritual  uses  of  a 
higher  than  material  life. 

Would  we  exchange  our  poverty  and  history,  our  poverty 
and  our  achievements  with  it;  the  influences  exerted,  the  good 
done,  the  reforms  begun,  aided  and  carried  forward  in  learning 
and  literature  and  music,  in  theology,  for  missions,  for  women, 
for  the  colored  race,  for  the  state,  the  nation  and  the  mankind ; 
for  a  quick  endowment  of  some  millions  in  a  new  beginning,  or 
on  the  foundation  of  a  buried  or  barren  past?  Nay,  our  in- 
heritance is  our  riches,  our  record  is  our  pledge  of  progress 
and  enlargement;  our  service  of  God  and  benefactions  to  man- 
kind are  our  title  to  the  generosity  of  present  and  of  future 
givers  to  the  cause  of  education. 

[65] 


This  is  the  day  to  resolve  that  the  work  of  the  college  be 
not  only  maintained,  but  improved  and  enlarged  without  yield- 
ing to  the  Academy  one  year  of  the  College  Course  and  re- 
serving from  the  university,  with  its  specialties  and  professional 
schools,  the  ancient  right  of  the  college  to  furnish  a  liberal  edu- 
cation and  the  opportunity  of  character-building,  while  intel- 
lectual and  moral  training  advance  together  with  effective  reli- 
gious teaching  and  influence  as  the  basis  of  morality. 

We  feel  that  this  union  is  secured  in  this  inauguration,  in 
a  presidency  which  should  serve  the  college,  preserving  its 
original  ideals,  animated  by  its  traditional  spirit  of  democracy 
and  loyalty  and  Christianity  for  another  period  of  twenty-five 
years,  or  to  its  first  centennial  in  1933. 

Let  these  be  our  thoughts  and  aspirations  for  the  college 
while,  with  mutual  congratulations  upon  the  present  and  with 
firm  assurance  for  the  future,  the  trustees  and  faculty,  the 
alumni  and  the  student  body,  and  all  friends  and  well-wishers 
of  the  college  join  in  welcoming  President  King  to  the  presi- 
dency of  Oberlin,  and  in  pledging  to  him  and  to  the  college 
loyal  and  liberal  continued  support. 


ADDRESS  BY  PROFESSOR  EDWARD  INCREASE 
BOSWORTH,  D.D., 

ON  BEHALF  OF  THE  FACULTY. 

The  situation  which  finds  its  culmination  today  is  not  an 
arbitrary  creation,  but  the  result  of  a  growth.  For  twenty-five 
years  in  the  logic  of  events  the  premises  have  been  forming  for 
the  conclusion  that  we  recognize  today.  None  have  had  better 
opportunities  to  see  this  than  those  for  whom  I  speak — the 
Faculty  of  Oberlin  College.  We  know  Henry  King  and  he 
knows  us.  He  knows  that  we  know  him,  and  we  know  that 
he  knows  us.  This  being  so,  no  more  significant  thing  can  be 
said  than  that  upon  this  glad  day,  not  only  in  appearance,  but 
in  heart,  the  Faculty  of  Oberlin  College  rejoices.  We  who 
have  seen  him  repeatedly  at  the  points  where  disillusion  is  likely 
to  be  experienced,  if  at  all,  are  the  ones  who  have  unwavering 
confidence  in  him  and  who  have  eagerly  anticipated  this  day. 
Those  who  have  worked  with  him  in  the  close  relationships 
which  often  breed  petty  jealousies  are  the  ones  whose  satisfac- 
tion is  most  sincere. 

We  have  a  confidence,  grounded  in  long  experience,  that 
under  his  leadership  we  shall  be  able  to  realize  the  true  ideal 
of  Christian  education.  We  know  well  his  ideal  of  the  intel- 
lectual attainment  essential  to  broad  education;  there  will  be 
honest  work  in  class  room,  laboratory,  and  seminar.  We  know 
that  in  his  ideal  of  education,  broadening  aesthetic  culture  is  an 
essential  element.  We  know  that  no  ideal  of  education  which 
does  not  involve  the  development  of  a  sincere  Christian  char- 
acter will  ever  prove  satisfactory  to  him.  The  College  will  do 
what  it  ought  only  as  it  turns  out  men  and  women  fitted  for 
life — men  and  women  simply  honest,  shrewdly  sympathetic, 
spiritually  poised,  fitted  for  life  in  the  new  order  that  we  call 
the  Kingdom  of  God  among  men. 

This  high  and  broad  ideal  of  Christian  education  we  ex- 

[67  ] 


pect,  for  two  reasons,  to  see  realized  in  ever-increasing  measure 
under  his  leadership.  We  are  sure,  in  the  first  place,  that  we 
shall  retain  our  individuality.  The  atmosphere  of  Oberlin  has 
always  favored  free  development  of  individuality.  The  divine 
right  to  be  one's  self  and  to  do  a  thing  in  one's  own  way  has 
always  been  recognized.  The  men  the  memory  of  whom  con- 
stitutes our  Oberlin  tradition  were  pioneers  in  thought  and 
life.  We  recognize  in  President  King  the  child  of  such  an 
ancestry.  His  own  quiet  independence  of  thought  and  readiness 
to  be  himself,  to  have  his  own  message  and  deliver  it  in  his  own 
way,  have  given  him  power  among  men  in  which  we  rejoice 
today.  We  know  that  under  his  leadership  wholesome  en- 
thusiasms, deep  and  strong,  will  develop  in  the  student  body 
without  apology.  This  shall  always  be  a  place  Where  everyone 
can  get  a  chance  at  the  best  things  in  his  own  way,  and  have  his 
own  inspiring  vision  of  life. 

We  are  confident  that  under  his  administration  we  shall 
be  able,  not  only  to  develop  our  own  individuality,  but  also  to 
relate  ourselves  to  others.  This  'has  always  been  our  tradition. 
Legitimate  peculiarity  has  seldom  developed  into  rank  eccen- 
tricity. It  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  in  a  situation  where 
religious  feeling  has  at  times  been  so  tense,  the  recluse  and  the 
doctrinaire  have  been  so  seldom  in  evidence.  The  atmosphere 
of  the  College  has  always  been  one  favorable  to  the  close  rela- 
tionship of  education  and  the  practical  life  of  the  world.  Great 
moral  reforms,  and  practical  politics  as  well,  have  appealed  to 
both  teacher  and  student,  and  we  believe  that  such  will  con- 
tinue to  be  the  case.  He  who  has  thought  so  profoundly  and 
spoken  so  clearly  upon  "Theology  and  the  Social  Consciousness" 
will  be  able  to  lead  men  and  women  of  marked  individuality 
into  close  and  sensitive  connection  with  the  life  of  the  great 
world. 

To  the  formation  of  this  ideal  of  Christian  education  that 
characterizes  our  life,  President  King  in  the  last  twenty-five 
years  has  made  no  small  contribution.  Today  we  as  a  Faculty 
pledge  him  our  loyal  co-operation  in  the  effort  to  secure  under 
his  leadership  as  President  a  larger  realization  of  the  ideal  that 

[68] 


he  as  teacher  has  helped  to  create.  From  the  college  men  and 
women  of  the  country  have  always  come  a  large  proportion  of 
those  destined  to  lead  in  its  life  and  thought.  It  is  they  who 
must  ever  stand  listening,  eager  to  hear  voices  calling  them  to 
launch  out  upon  the  great  sea  of  undiscovered  truth.  It  is  our 
joy  today  to  see  placed  at  the  center  of  our  little  group  in  this 
great  company  Henry  King,  our  seer,  our  leader,  and  our  friend. 


ADDRESS  OF  PRESIDENT  WILLIAM  GOODELL 
FROST,  PH.  D.,  D.  D., 

OF  THE  CLASS  OF  1876,  ON  BEHALF  OF  THE  ALUMNI. 

John  Shipherd,  the  pioneer;  Asa  Mahan,  the  prophet; 
Charles  G.  Finney,  the  preacher;  James  H.  Fairchild,  the 
philosopher;  William  G.  Ballantine,  the  scholar;  John  Henry 
Barrows,  the  publicist;  Henry  Churchill  King,  the  educator. 
King  is  Oberlin's  seventh  son. 

As  a  graduate  and  the  son  of  a  graduate,  I  am  set  to 
speak  a  word  for  the  alumni.  We  return  too  seldom,  but  when 
we  come,  it  is  as  to  Jerusalem.  We  have  left  our  plow  in  the 
furrow.  A  thousand  important  enterprises  stand  still  today 
in  order  that  we  may  gather  at  this  center  of  inspiration,  that 
we  may  look  once  more  at  those  ideals  of  conduct  and  character 
which  our  Alma  Mater  gave  us  to  be  the  stars  of  our  firmament, 
and  that  we  may  bid  God-speed  to  a  new  spiritual  leader. 

This  is  the  eloquence  of  Oberlin  to  us:  Here  was  the 
burning  bush  where  God  spoke  to  us.  From  these  choir  seats 
Allen  and  Chamberlain  sang  forth  the  challenge,  "Must  Jesus 
bear  the  cross  alone  ?"  Under  that  gallery  James  Monroe  gath- 
ered his  great  Bible  class.  From  this  pulpit  Morgan,  and 
Cowles,  and  Brand  poured  out  the  everlasting  Gospel.  And  in 
yonder  class-rooms  Hudson,  and  Peck,  and  Thome,  Hiram 
Mead,  and  Judson  Smith,  Cross,  and  Dascomb,  and  Ellis,  and 
Mrs.  Johnston,  and  Shurtleff,  and  Churchill,  and  Ryder  opened 
up  to  us  the  inner  and  the  outer  universe.  This  is  our  debt  to 
Oberlin:  we  came  here  callow,  purposeless  boys  and  girls,  and 
we  were  shown  that  a  great  struggle  was  going  on  between  right 
and  wrong,  between  progress  and  conventionality,  and  that  each 
one  of  us  had  a  chance  to  be  a  soldier.  This  was  our  place  of 
enlistment. 

But  Oberlin  reminiscences  all  have  a  face  to  the  future. 
We  have  come  to  repeat  our  oath  of  fealty  to  Oberlin  and  to 

[71] 


express  our  confidence  in  her  new  President.  We  pledge  him 
our  united  and  our  unreserved  support. 

And,  President  King,  we  realize  that  we  are  inducting 
you  into  an  office  which  is  no  mere  honor.  The  duties  of  a 
governor,  a  bishop,  or  a  commodore  do  not  compare  in  weight 
and  intricacy  with  those  of  a  true  college  president,  who  must 
be  at  once  a  Joseph  in  finance  and  a  Paul  in  self-forgetful  zeal. 
It  is  a  task  to  be  undertaken  only  in  the  spirit  of  consecration: 
a  task  which  will  both  gladden  your  heart  and  shorten  your  life. 

We  sometimes  speak  of  the  trying  times  in  the  history  of  an 
institution  or  a  nation.  But,  my  friends,  all  times  are  trying 
when  there  are  heroes  on  the  stage.  The  only  times  which  do 
not  try  men's  souls  are  the  times  of  negligence,  supineness,  and 
disgrace.  It  is  because  we  know  King  will  have  an  adminis- 
tration full  of  the  storm  and  stress  of  real  achievement — achieve- 
ment which  does  not  float  upon  the  tide,  but  stems  it — that  we 
are  here  to  strengthen  his  hands. 

In  the  history  of  all  institutions  the  test  comes  not  in  the 
founding,  but  in  the  maintaining  and  reforming.  Every  head 
of  a  religious  establishment  like  Oberlin  College  has  two  cease- 
less wars,  one  against  worldliness,  and  one  against  scholasticism. 

Here  is  the  great  tide  of  worldliness,  like  the  Mississippi 
chafing  at  its  levees,  which  surges  against  every  endowed  in- 
stitution. It  is  Christ's  testimony  that  those  who  sit  in  Moses* 
.seat,  and  are  engaged  as  we  are,  in  building  the  tombs  of  the 
martyrs,  are  subject  to  special  temptations.  Let  us  face  the 
fact  that  most  of  the  great  religious  bodies,  including  the  one 
to  which  Oberlin  chiefly  belongs,  have  almost  ceased  to  grow. 
The  minister  has  settled  down  with  a  good  reason  why  his 
Sunday  School  cannot  increase,  and  why  his  preaching  cannot 
lead  to  conversions.  We  hardly  send  our  ablest  sons  into  the 
ministry,  or  our  ablest  ministers  to  the  hard  fields  where  growth 
should  come.  These  noble  bodies  stand  splendid  in  their  history 
and  equipment,  going  through  ineffective  motions  like  the  army 
of  McClellan.  Our  eyes  are  filled  with  other  things  and  we 
do  not  see  the  people  who  need  spiritual  guidance — the  white 
harvest  fields  are  unreaped.  It  is  worldliness — putting  the  ex- 

[72] 


ternal  and  secondary  in  the  place  of  the  highest,  setting  great 
and  good  things,  like  commerce  and  music,  above  religion, 
abolishing  the  Day  of  Prayer  for  Colleges,  that  we  may  have 
-one  more  lesson  in  Chemistry  and  the  History  of  Art.  Now, 
Finney's  pulpit  is  the  place,  and  the  inauguration  of  a  new  presi- 
dent is  the  time  to  raise  the  question,  where  shall  the  reaction, 
the  next  spiritual  renaissance,  begin?  Must  it  begin  as  at  other 
times  in  some  obscure  sect,  some  persecuted  band  of  students, 
or  can  it  begin  in  the  hearts  of  a  faculty  of  teachers? 

The  first  inspiration  of  our  founders  came  from  the  Alsa- 
tian pastor,  John  Frederick  Oberlin.  And  there  has  just  come 
another  prophet's  voice  from  those  same  far-off  Alsatian  Moun- 
tains. It  is  Wagner's  little  book,  "The  Simple  Life,"  full  of 
the  ideals  which  we  back  numbers  of  the  alumni  received  from 
our  teachers  in  Oberlin,  and  which  are  at  once  recognized  by 
the  elect  everywhere  as  part  of  a  universal  and  infallible  Gos- 
pel. Let  us  pass  on  these  high  traditions  to  our  pupils  of  today. 
""Labor,"  he  says,  "for  people  whom  the  world  forgets;  make 
yourselves  intelligible  to  the  humble;  so  shall  you  open  again 
the  springs  whence  these  Masters  drew,  whose  works  have  de- 
fied the  ages,  because  they  knew  how  to  clothe  genius  in  sim- 
plicity." 

And  there  is  the  other  battle  against  scholasticism.  When 
a  young  pastor  fails  in  his  parish,  the  Seminary  instead  of  teach- 
ing him  to  give  a  warmer  handshake  sometimes  invites  him  to 
return  to  the  seclusion  and  comfort  which  have  been  his  un- 
doing, and  take  a  fourth  year  in  Hebrew  and  the  History  of 
Doctrine ! 

President  King,  we  desire  above  all  things  to  have 
our  children  get  in  Oberlin  what  we  received — the  impulse  to 
l>e  soldiers.  If  my  boy  is  as  coltish  and  wrong-headed  as  his 
father  at  the  same  age — if  he  escapes  the  influence  of  the  or- 
dinary pastor  and  the  chance  teacher — we  shall  send  him  to 
Oberlin,  not  because  you  have  a  gymnasium  and  a  laboratory, 
though  we  rejoice  in  these,  but  because  you  have  teachers  of 
character-forming  power.  When  the  choice  comes  between  the 
specialist  who  is  interested  in  his  specialty,  and  the  educator 

[73] 


who  is  interested  in  young  men  and  women,  the  Alumni  cast 
their  votes  for  the  educator. 

So  we  must  separate  tomorrow  to  our  several  posts  of  duty. 
But  we  go  strengthened  by  this  meeting.  We  hail  President 
King  as  the  Lord's  anointed  for  this  high  office.  He  has  spoken 
words  which  our  hearts  recognize.  From  every  compass-point 
we  look  to  this  College.  We  belong  to  Oberlin.  And  we  are 
glad  to  feel  that  Oberlin  has  a  leader. 


[74] 


ADDRESS  BY  MR.  DAHL  BUCHANAN  COOPER, 

OF  THE  CLASS  OF   IQOS,  ON  BEHALF  OF  THE  STUDENTS. 

Oberlin  Friends,  Members  of  the  Faculty,  and  Fellow  Students: 
Six  months  ago  with  band  playing,  with  Hi-O-Hi's  ringing, 
with  the  old  chapel  bell  making  a  last  strenuous  effort  to  outdo 
itself,  the  Oberlin  students  inaugurated  their  President  in  their 
own  student  way.  Today  we  come  with  less  clamor,  but  with 
a  zeal  grown  greater  with  the  days,  to  add  our  testimony  to  that 
of  riper  years  on  this  memorable  occasion.  Nor  do  we  fear  to 
raise  our  voices  in  jubilant  inauguration  chorus,  because  we  feel 
.and  know  that  the  Oberlin  student  yields  to  no  one  in  his  in- 
terest in  this  day's  event.  Who  more  than  he  is  a  part  of  his 
Alma  Mater?  Who  more  than  he  has  the  right  to  show  en- 
thusiasm at  her  inauguration  hour? 

Today,  with  hearts  thoughtfully  glad  we  cease  our  daily 
round  of  student  life,  and  plunge  ourselves  in  depths  of  loyalty 
to  the  college  which  is  our  college.  We  live  in  thought  the  life 
of  her  historic  past  and  are  filled  with  reverence  for  it.  We 
live  back  her  pioneer  days,  toil  with  her  founders,  and  rejoice 
with  them  in  the  humble  beginnings  which  made  the  present 
hour  possible.  We  follow  in  sympathy  her  struggling  growth 
and  are  glad  with  the  world  for  the  influence  of  that  struggle. 
What  but  unbounded  college  patriotism  can  issue  from  a  glimpse 
into  this  rugged  past!  And  yet  we  are  not  content.  In  the 
midst  of  our  admiration  presses  the  thought  that  in  all  this  we 
have  had  no  part.  This  history  has  been  made  and  we  honor 
those  who  made  it.  But  to  rest  content  with  a  glorious  past  is 
not  within  our  power.  We  realize  that  Oberlin  history  is  still 
making  and  we  are  making  it.  Students  are  still  walking  her 
halls  and  we  are  those  students.  Hearts  are  still  strong  in  her 
service,  and  ours  are  those  hearts. 

As  on  this  occasion  the  college  begins  another  eventful  era, 
we  claim  an  honest  pride  in  being  the  students  who  witness  its 

[751 


beginning.  Yet  ours  is  not  an  enthusiasm  born  of  the  hour.  It 
is  deep  rooted  in  a  firm  belief  in  the  principles  of  the  college  we 
love.  Ours  is  not  a  narrow  enthusiasm;  we  stand  today  for 
the  best  and  broadest  that  Oberlin  gives  us.  Ours  is  the  spirit 
which  would  cheer  lustily  as  the  crimson  and  gold  crosses  the 
goal  line.  Ours  is  the  spirit  which  would  bow  reverently  as  the 
silent  testimony  of  mission  martyrs  is  borne  across  the  sea 
from  China  land. 

Standing  in  the  presence  of  representatives  of  our  sister  in- 
stitutions of  America,  we  invite  the  criticism  that  we  are  proud~ 
Proud  of  our  college  with  her  glorious  past;  prouder  still  that 
we  are  students  in  her  more  glorious  present.  We  would  yield 
to  the  sons  of  the  Harvards  and  Yales  a  loyalty  similar  to  ours;, 
we  would  yield  to  none  in  the  degree  of  that  loyalty.  For  the 
student  today  who  is  not  aglow  with  the  spirit  of  his  college,  we 
pity.  Pity  him  as  a  man  without  a  college.  He  cannot  be 
claimed  as  our  own. 

And  yet  our  love  for  our  college  is  not  a  sentimental  love.. 
We  love  her  because  we  can  love  her.  We  love  her  as  radical, 
who  has  dared  to  lead  in  right  when  to  lead  was  to  lead  alone. 
We  love  her  as  conservative  who  has  refused  to  follow  when 
to  follow  was  to  sacrifice  her  usefulness.  We  love  her  simple 
democracy  which  knows  not  wealth  or  poverty ;  which  places  the 
hand-soiled  student  with  his  stern  stuff  in  the  van  of  her  moving, 
forces.  We  love  that  democracy,  and  though  the  student  prayer 
is  for  endowment  millions,  that  same  prayer  would  forbid  those 
millions  to  sully  the  motto  of  learning  and  labor  of  the  poor 
man's  college.  And  last  of  all  we  love  the  college  which  stands 
for  character;  which  pours  moral-minded  men  into  the  world's 
hard  places  with  honest  heart  and  quickened  brain  combined 
in  Christian  usefulness. 

It  is  little  wonder  then  that  we  joy  today  in  honoring  our 
college  by  honoring  him  whom  we  are  placing  at  its  head.  We 
as  students  are  glad  to  renew  our  heart-born  allegiance  to  him 
who  has  done  so  much  to  shape  the  ideals  of  the  college;  who> 
today  embodies  those  ideals  in  a  personality  that  we  deeply  love. 
As  he  assumes  the  responsibility  for  what  promises  to  be  Ober- 

t  76] 


Hn's  brightest  days,  we  as  students  shall  labor  with  him.  We 
shall  be  responsible  for  her  student  life  to  make  it  worthy  of 
the  name  it  bears.  With  the  rugged,  resolute  spirit  of  true  sons 
and  daughters  of  Oberlin,  we  pledge  our  best  to  her  best,  our 
lives  to  her  life;  and  when  with  waning  years  the  administra- 
tion now  beginning  shall  have  its  close,  today's  enthusiasm  of 
youth  shall  give  place  to  the  time-tried  loyalty  of  venerable  years, 
and  Oberlin  shall  have  recorded  her  most  brilliant  epoch  in  a 
most  glorious  history. 


SONNET  TO   HENRY  CHURCHILL  KING 

On  His  Accession  to  the  Presidency  of  Oberlin  College. 

In  Paolo's  marble  chancel,  mute  I  gazed 

Upon  the  carven  altar's  majesty  of  art; 

Its  wondrous  fretted  beauty  smote  my  heart 

To  hungry  sighs — at  such  achievement  mazed. 

I  turned  to  leave ;  when,  like  a  radiant  psalm, 

Through  the  pane's  crimson,  throbbed  the  glorious  light. 

My  heart,  song-filled,  surged  eager  at  the  sight, 

And  swept  me  into  hope's  triumphant  calm. 

So,  thou  art  not  the  object  of  men's  cries, 

Posed  for  the  plaudits  of  the  admiring  throng, 

But  like  the  lucent  crystal,  to  our  eyes 

Thou  dost  transmit  the  glory  and  the  song 

Of  the  eternal  morning.     Hope,  serene  and  wise, 

And  heart-ripe  faith  we  learn ;  and  we  are  strong. 

James  Rain* 


[  77  ] 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


17  1948 


80ct'65l 

IN  STACKS 


REC'D 


LOAM 


LD  21-100m-9,'47(A5702sl6)476 


Sri()7G2 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


